张力带克氏针与经皮质螺钉固定治疗鹰嘴骨折的功能和放射学效果比较——一项随机对照研究。

IF 1 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Siddhartha Sinha, Rajiv Maharjan, Guru P Khanal, Bishnu Pokharel, Nikhil Drolia, Sumit Gupta, Rajesh K Kanojia, Pashupati Chaudhary
{"title":"张力带克氏针与经皮质螺钉固定治疗鹰嘴骨折的功能和放射学效果比较——一项随机对照研究。","authors":"Siddhartha Sinha,&nbsp;Rajiv Maharjan,&nbsp;Guru P Khanal,&nbsp;Bishnu Pokharel,&nbsp;Nikhil Drolia,&nbsp;Sumit Gupta,&nbsp;Rajesh K Kanojia,&nbsp;Pashupati Chaudhary","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1510","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of fixation of olecranon fractures by a transcortical screw with conventional tension band wiring (TBW) using a Kirschner wire (K-wire).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This is a non-blinded randomised controlled trial comprising two groups (<i>n</i> = 30 each) with Mayo type A olecranon fractures fixed with either TBW or transcortical cancellous screws (CCS). Outcomes included the Mayo elbow performance index (MEPI), time to union, range of motion (ROM), and rates of complication among these two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most of the patients showed excellent scoring as per MEPI in both the groups at 6 weeks (90% in TBW group and 76.7% in CCS group) and were not significant (<i>p</i> = 0.719). Signs of the radiological union were noted in 80% of the cases at 6 weeks and complete at 6 months. Hardware-related complications (8.3% symptomatic hardware and 6.7% implant back-out), infection, and mean ROM were similar between the two groups (elbow flexion was 142.33 ± 24.67° in TBW group and 143.1 ± 10.19° in transcortical screw group, <i>p</i> = 0.246) at the end of the study.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There were no statistically significant differences in the clinical-radiological outcomes and complications fixing the non-comminuted olecranon fractures with either transcortical screw or TBW.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>Transcortical screw fixation is an acceptable alternative to TBW for non-comminuted olecranon fractures in terms of union and functional outcome.</p><p><strong>How to cite this article: </strong>Sinha S, Maharjan R, Khanal GP, <i>et al.</i> Comparison of Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Olecranon Fractures Treated with Tension Band Wiring with Kirschner Wires to Transcortical Screw Fixation-A Randomised Controlled Study. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2020;15(3):131-137.</p>","PeriodicalId":21979,"journal":{"name":"Strategies in Trauma and Limb Reconstruction","volume":"15 3","pages":"131-137"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/6e/3c/stlr-15-131.PMC8121108.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Olecranon Fractures Treated with Tension Band Wiring with Kirschner Wires to Transcortical Screw Fixation-A Randomised Controlled Study.\",\"authors\":\"Siddhartha Sinha,&nbsp;Rajiv Maharjan,&nbsp;Guru P Khanal,&nbsp;Bishnu Pokharel,&nbsp;Nikhil Drolia,&nbsp;Sumit Gupta,&nbsp;Rajesh K Kanojia,&nbsp;Pashupati Chaudhary\",\"doi\":\"10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1510\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of fixation of olecranon fractures by a transcortical screw with conventional tension band wiring (TBW) using a Kirschner wire (K-wire).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This is a non-blinded randomised controlled trial comprising two groups (<i>n</i> = 30 each) with Mayo type A olecranon fractures fixed with either TBW or transcortical cancellous screws (CCS). Outcomes included the Mayo elbow performance index (MEPI), time to union, range of motion (ROM), and rates of complication among these two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most of the patients showed excellent scoring as per MEPI in both the groups at 6 weeks (90% in TBW group and 76.7% in CCS group) and were not significant (<i>p</i> = 0.719). Signs of the radiological union were noted in 80% of the cases at 6 weeks and complete at 6 months. Hardware-related complications (8.3% symptomatic hardware and 6.7% implant back-out), infection, and mean ROM were similar between the two groups (elbow flexion was 142.33 ± 24.67° in TBW group and 143.1 ± 10.19° in transcortical screw group, <i>p</i> = 0.246) at the end of the study.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There were no statistically significant differences in the clinical-radiological outcomes and complications fixing the non-comminuted olecranon fractures with either transcortical screw or TBW.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>Transcortical screw fixation is an acceptable alternative to TBW for non-comminuted olecranon fractures in terms of union and functional outcome.</p><p><strong>How to cite this article: </strong>Sinha S, Maharjan R, Khanal GP, <i>et al.</i> Comparison of Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Olecranon Fractures Treated with Tension Band Wiring with Kirschner Wires to Transcortical Screw Fixation-A Randomised Controlled Study. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2020;15(3):131-137.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21979,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Strategies in Trauma and Limb Reconstruction\",\"volume\":\"15 3\",\"pages\":\"131-137\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/6e/3c/stlr-15-131.PMC8121108.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Strategies in Trauma and Limb Reconstruction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1510\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Strategies in Trauma and Limb Reconstruction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1510","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较经皮质螺钉与常规克氏针张力带钢丝(TBW)固定鹰嘴骨折的临床和影像学效果。材料和方法:这是一项非盲随机对照试验,包括两组(n = 30),使用TBW或经皮质松质螺钉(CCS)固定Mayo a型鹰嘴骨折。结果包括两组患者的Mayo肘关节表现指数(MEPI)、关节愈合时间、关节活动度(ROM)和并发症发生率。结果:两组患者6周MEPI评分均为优(TBW组90%,CCS组76.7%),差异无统计学意义(p = 0.719)。80%的病例在6周和6个月时出现放射愈合迹象。研究结束时,两组患者肘关节屈曲(TBW组为142.33±24.67°,经皮质螺钉组为143.1±10.19°,p = 0.246)的硬件相关并发症(8.3%有症状的硬件和6.7%的植入物退出)、感染和平均ROM相似。结论:经皮质螺钉与TBW固定非粉碎性鹰嘴骨折的临床影像学结果及并发症无统计学差异。临床意义:就愈合和功能结果而言,经皮质螺钉固定是一种可接受的替代TBW治疗非粉碎性鹰嘴骨折。如何引用本文:Sinha S, Maharjan R, Khanal GP等。张力带克氏针与经皮质螺钉固定治疗鹰嘴骨折的功能和放射学效果比较——一项随机对照研究。创伤肢体重建,2020;15(3):131-137。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Olecranon Fractures Treated with Tension Band Wiring with Kirschner Wires to Transcortical Screw Fixation-A Randomised Controlled Study.

Comparison of Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Olecranon Fractures Treated with Tension Band Wiring with Kirschner Wires to Transcortical Screw Fixation-A Randomised Controlled Study.

Comparison of Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Olecranon Fractures Treated with Tension Band Wiring with Kirschner Wires to Transcortical Screw Fixation-A Randomised Controlled Study.

Comparison of Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Olecranon Fractures Treated with Tension Band Wiring with Kirschner Wires to Transcortical Screw Fixation-A Randomised Controlled Study.

Aim: To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of fixation of olecranon fractures by a transcortical screw with conventional tension band wiring (TBW) using a Kirschner wire (K-wire).

Materials and methods: This is a non-blinded randomised controlled trial comprising two groups (n = 30 each) with Mayo type A olecranon fractures fixed with either TBW or transcortical cancellous screws (CCS). Outcomes included the Mayo elbow performance index (MEPI), time to union, range of motion (ROM), and rates of complication among these two groups.

Results: Most of the patients showed excellent scoring as per MEPI in both the groups at 6 weeks (90% in TBW group and 76.7% in CCS group) and were not significant (p = 0.719). Signs of the radiological union were noted in 80% of the cases at 6 weeks and complete at 6 months. Hardware-related complications (8.3% symptomatic hardware and 6.7% implant back-out), infection, and mean ROM were similar between the two groups (elbow flexion was 142.33 ± 24.67° in TBW group and 143.1 ± 10.19° in transcortical screw group, p = 0.246) at the end of the study.

Conclusion: There were no statistically significant differences in the clinical-radiological outcomes and complications fixing the non-comminuted olecranon fractures with either transcortical screw or TBW.

Clinical significance: Transcortical screw fixation is an acceptable alternative to TBW for non-comminuted olecranon fractures in terms of union and functional outcome.

How to cite this article: Sinha S, Maharjan R, Khanal GP, et al. Comparison of Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Olecranon Fractures Treated with Tension Band Wiring with Kirschner Wires to Transcortical Screw Fixation-A Randomised Controlled Study. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2020;15(3):131-137.

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
Strategies in Trauma and Limb Reconstruction
Strategies in Trauma and Limb Reconstruction Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Strategies in Trauma and Limb Reconstruction is dedicated to surgeons, allied medical professionals and researchers in the field of orthopaedics and trauma. The scope of the journal is to discuss the fields of skeletal injury, and the complications thereof, congenital and acquired limb deformities and deficiencies, and orthopaedic-related infection, together with their surgical and non-surgical treatments. The journal publishes original articles, reviews, case reports, descriptions of new or recognised treatment techniques, forum discussions of clinical scenarios and relevant correspondence. It aims to provide a widely accessible source of useful information to practitioners in the field through the problem- or technique-based approach of published articles.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信