比较一种新型双框架外固定装置与掌侧锁定钢板和外固定装置在不稳定桡骨远端骨折患者中的临床效果:一项为期两年的回顾性比较队列研究。

IF 4.3
Annals of medicine Pub Date : 2025-12-01 Epub Date: 2025-06-26 DOI:10.1080/07853890.2025.2524090
Zhi-Yuan Yao, Xu-Song Li, Jie-Feng Huang
{"title":"比较一种新型双框架外固定装置与掌侧锁定钢板和外固定装置在不稳定桡骨远端骨折患者中的临床效果:一项为期两年的回顾性比较队列研究。","authors":"Zhi-Yuan Yao, Xu-Song Li, Jie-Feng Huang","doi":"10.1080/07853890.2025.2524090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Volar locking plate (VLP) fixation for unstable distal radius fractures (DRF) requires extensive soft tissue dissection and is associated with implant-related complications. Conventional external fixator (EF) carries risks such as reduction loss, pin loosening, and unstable traction. This study retrospectively evaluates the clinical efficacy and safety of a novel bi-frame external fixation device (BEF) compared with VLP and EF over a two-year period.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>rA total of 131 patients with unstable DRF treated between 2015 and 2022 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University were included (42 BEF, 44 EF, 45 VLP). Functional outcomes included wrist range of motion and grip strength. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) scores. Radiographic parameters and complications were recorded. Statistical comparisons used t-tests, Mann-Whitney U-tests, and chi-square or Fisher's exact tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Baseline characteristics were comparable. BEF showed significantly shorter time from injury to surgery than VLP (17.2±5.2 vs. 68.3±24.1 hours, <i>p</i> < 0.001), and shorter operation time than EF (<i>p</i> = 0.028) and VLP (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Early outcomes favored VLP, but long-term results were comparable (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Compared with EF, BEF better preserved radial height, ulnar variance, pronation, and ulnar deviation (all <i>p</i> < 0.05), with fewer overall complications (<i>p</i> = 0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BEF represents an innovative, viable and safe alternative for unstable DRF. Further multicenter randomized trials with extended follow-up are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":93874,"journal":{"name":"Annals of medicine","volume":"57 1","pages":"2524090"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12203688/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing the clinical outcomes of an innovative bi-frame external fixation device compared to those of volar locking plate and external fixator device among patients with unstable distal radius fractures: a two-year retrospective comparative cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Zhi-Yuan Yao, Xu-Song Li, Jie-Feng Huang\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/07853890.2025.2524090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Volar locking plate (VLP) fixation for unstable distal radius fractures (DRF) requires extensive soft tissue dissection and is associated with implant-related complications. Conventional external fixator (EF) carries risks such as reduction loss, pin loosening, and unstable traction. This study retrospectively evaluates the clinical efficacy and safety of a novel bi-frame external fixation device (BEF) compared with VLP and EF over a two-year period.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>rA total of 131 patients with unstable DRF treated between 2015 and 2022 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University were included (42 BEF, 44 EF, 45 VLP). Functional outcomes included wrist range of motion and grip strength. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) scores. Radiographic parameters and complications were recorded. Statistical comparisons used t-tests, Mann-Whitney U-tests, and chi-square or Fisher's exact tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Baseline characteristics were comparable. BEF showed significantly shorter time from injury to surgery than VLP (17.2±5.2 vs. 68.3±24.1 hours, <i>p</i> < 0.001), and shorter operation time than EF (<i>p</i> = 0.028) and VLP (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Early outcomes favored VLP, but long-term results were comparable (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Compared with EF, BEF better preserved radial height, ulnar variance, pronation, and ulnar deviation (all <i>p</i> < 0.05), with fewer overall complications (<i>p</i> = 0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BEF represents an innovative, viable and safe alternative for unstable DRF. Further multicenter randomized trials with extended follow-up are warranted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93874,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of medicine\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"2524090\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12203688/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2025.2524090\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2025.2524090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:掌侧锁定钢板(VLP)固定治疗不稳定桡骨远端骨折(DRF)需要广泛的软组织剥离,并伴有植入物相关并发症。传统的外固定架(EF)存在复位丢失、针松动和牵引不稳定等风险。本研究回顾性评估了一种新型双框架外固定装置(BEF)与VLP和EF在两年期间的临床疗效和安全性。方法:选取2015 - 2022年浙江中医药大学第一附属医院收治的不稳定型DRF患者131例(BEF 42例,EF 44例,VLP 45例)。功能结果包括手腕活动范围和握力。采用视觉模拟量表(VAS)、患者腕部评估(PRWE)和手臂、肩膀和手的快速残疾(QuickDASH)评分对患者报告的结果进行评估。记录影像学参数及并发症。统计比较使用t检验、Mann-Whitney u检验、卡方检验或Fisher精确检验。结果:基线特征可比较。BEF损伤至手术时间明显短于VLP(17.2±5.2 h vs. 68.3±24.1 h, p < 0.001),手术时间明显短于EF (p = 0.028)和VLP (p < 0.001)。早期结果有利于VLP,但长期结果具有可比性(p < 0.05)。与EF相比,BEF更好地保留了桡骨高度、尺方差、尺前旋和尺偏(均p < 0.05),总并发症较少(p = 0.005)。结论:BEF是一种创新的、可行的、安全的不稳定DRF替代方案。进一步的多中心随机试验需要延长随访时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing the clinical outcomes of an innovative bi-frame external fixation device compared to those of volar locking plate and external fixator device among patients with unstable distal radius fractures: a two-year retrospective comparative cohort study.

Background: Volar locking plate (VLP) fixation for unstable distal radius fractures (DRF) requires extensive soft tissue dissection and is associated with implant-related complications. Conventional external fixator (EF) carries risks such as reduction loss, pin loosening, and unstable traction. This study retrospectively evaluates the clinical efficacy and safety of a novel bi-frame external fixation device (BEF) compared with VLP and EF over a two-year period.

Methods: rA total of 131 patients with unstable DRF treated between 2015 and 2022 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University were included (42 BEF, 44 EF, 45 VLP). Functional outcomes included wrist range of motion and grip strength. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) scores. Radiographic parameters and complications were recorded. Statistical comparisons used t-tests, Mann-Whitney U-tests, and chi-square or Fisher's exact tests.

Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable. BEF showed significantly shorter time from injury to surgery than VLP (17.2±5.2 vs. 68.3±24.1 hours, p < 0.001), and shorter operation time than EF (p = 0.028) and VLP (p < 0.001). Early outcomes favored VLP, but long-term results were comparable (p > 0.05). Compared with EF, BEF better preserved radial height, ulnar variance, pronation, and ulnar deviation (all p < 0.05), with fewer overall complications (p = 0.005).

Conclusions: BEF represents an innovative, viable and safe alternative for unstable DRF. Further multicenter randomized trials with extended follow-up are warranted.

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