锁定钉与锁定螺钉在桡骨远端骨折掌侧钢板中的应用。

IF 2.2
Nicole M van Veelen, Matija Horvat, Björn-Christian Link, Bryan J M van de Wall, Frank J P Beeres
{"title":"锁定钉与锁定螺钉在桡骨远端骨折掌侧钢板中的应用。","authors":"Nicole M van Veelen, Matija Horvat, Björn-Christian Link, Bryan J M van de Wall, Frank J P Beeres","doi":"10.1007/s00068-025-02876-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the radiological outcome of patients with distal radius fractures stabilized with a volar plate using either locking screws or pegs.</p><p><strong>Material & methods: </strong>For this retrospective study all adult patients that received volar plating of a distal radius fracture at a trauma center between 06/2019 and 06/2022 were eligible for inclusion. Only patients who received an implant allowing both locking pegs and screws were included. Primary outcome was radiological loss of reduction at the 6-week and at the 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were duration of surgery, implant removal, fracture union and complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourty-nine patients treated with pegs and 39 with screws were included. Patient demographics were comparable, however there were more complex fractures in the peg group. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of radiological loss of reduction between the groups at 6 weeks or 12 months (p = 1). Patients treated with pegs were more frequently operated upon by experienced surgeons while screws were more often used by more junior staff. The duration of surgery was longer for patients who received screws (p = 0.003). Union was achieved in all fractures for which a 12-month x-ray was available. There was no significant difference in implant removal rate or other complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Regarding secondary loss of reduction both locking pegs and screws show similar results. Considering the potential benefits of pegs, such as the smooth surface which may reduce the risk of joint penetration, pegs are a viable alternative to screws.</p>","PeriodicalId":520620,"journal":{"name":"European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society","volume":"51 1","pages":"217"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12098432/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Locking pegs versus locking screws in volar plating of distal radius fractures.\",\"authors\":\"Nicole M van Veelen, Matija Horvat, Björn-Christian Link, Bryan J M van de Wall, Frank J P Beeres\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00068-025-02876-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the radiological outcome of patients with distal radius fractures stabilized with a volar plate using either locking screws or pegs.</p><p><strong>Material & methods: </strong>For this retrospective study all adult patients that received volar plating of a distal radius fracture at a trauma center between 06/2019 and 06/2022 were eligible for inclusion. Only patients who received an implant allowing both locking pegs and screws were included. Primary outcome was radiological loss of reduction at the 6-week and at the 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were duration of surgery, implant removal, fracture union and complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourty-nine patients treated with pegs and 39 with screws were included. Patient demographics were comparable, however there were more complex fractures in the peg group. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of radiological loss of reduction between the groups at 6 weeks or 12 months (p = 1). Patients treated with pegs were more frequently operated upon by experienced surgeons while screws were more often used by more junior staff. The duration of surgery was longer for patients who received screws (p = 0.003). Union was achieved in all fractures for which a 12-month x-ray was available. There was no significant difference in implant removal rate or other complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Regarding secondary loss of reduction both locking pegs and screws show similar results. Considering the potential benefits of pegs, such as the smooth surface which may reduce the risk of joint penetration, pegs are a viable alternative to screws.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520620,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"217\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12098432/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-025-02876-w\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-025-02876-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是比较桡骨远端骨折经掌侧钢板固定后使用锁定螺钉或钉固定的放射学结果。材料和方法:在这项回顾性研究中,所有在2019年6月至2022年6月期间在创伤中心接受桡骨远端骨折掌侧钢板治疗的成年患者均符合纳入条件。仅包括接受了同时允许锁定钉和螺钉植入的患者。在6周和12个月的随访中,主要结果是放射学上的复位损失。次要结果为手术时间、植入物取出、骨折愈合和并发症。结果:49例用钉治疗,39例用螺钉治疗。患者的人口统计数据具有可比性,但钉住组有更多的复杂骨折。在6周或12个月时,两组间放射学复位损失的发生率无显著差异(p = 1)。有经验的外科医生更常使用钉治疗的患者,而更初级的工作人员更常使用螺钉。接受螺钉治疗的患者手术时间更长(p = 0.003)。所有12个月x线检查的骨折均愈合。两组间种植体拔除率及其他并发症无显著差异。结论:对于继发性复位损失,锁钉和螺钉的结果相似。考虑到钉的潜在优势,例如光滑的表面可以降低关节穿透的风险,钉是螺钉的可行替代品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Locking pegs versus locking screws in volar plating of distal radius fractures.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the radiological outcome of patients with distal radius fractures stabilized with a volar plate using either locking screws or pegs.

Material & methods: For this retrospective study all adult patients that received volar plating of a distal radius fracture at a trauma center between 06/2019 and 06/2022 were eligible for inclusion. Only patients who received an implant allowing both locking pegs and screws were included. Primary outcome was radiological loss of reduction at the 6-week and at the 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were duration of surgery, implant removal, fracture union and complications.

Results: Fourty-nine patients treated with pegs and 39 with screws were included. Patient demographics were comparable, however there were more complex fractures in the peg group. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of radiological loss of reduction between the groups at 6 weeks or 12 months (p = 1). Patients treated with pegs were more frequently operated upon by experienced surgeons while screws were more often used by more junior staff. The duration of surgery was longer for patients who received screws (p = 0.003). Union was achieved in all fractures for which a 12-month x-ray was available. There was no significant difference in implant removal rate or other complications.

Conclusions: Regarding secondary loss of reduction both locking pegs and screws show similar results. Considering the potential benefits of pegs, such as the smooth surface which may reduce the risk of joint penetration, pegs are a viable alternative to screws.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信