掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效的比较

目的 比较掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折的长期疗效.方法 对2005年9月-2007年11月间,采用切开复位掌侧锁定接骨板或普通接骨板内固定的45例随访资料完整的患者,进行两种疗法的比较.其中23例行锁定接骨板内固定,22例行普通接骨板内固定.按照AO分型:A型11例,B型11例,C型23例.随访内容包括:腕关节活动度(屈曲、背伸、尺偏、桡偏),前臂旋前、旋后活动范围,影像学资料(尺偏角、掌倾角、桡骨高度),应用DASH上肢功能评定标准和Gartland/Wertey腕关节评分法进行评分.结果 术后随访时间平均为18.8个月(12～36个月).腕关节活动度中,锁定板组背伸及两组的桡偏范围低于Gartland/Werley腕关节评分的基本范围.两组DASH值、腕关节活动度及前臂旋转范围,握力、捏力的恢复差异无统计学意义.Gartland/Werley腕关节评分普通接骨板治疗组优于锁定接骨板治疗组,差异有统计学意义.掌倾角均值两组都低于正常范围,尺偏角与桡骨高度均值在正常范围内,两组间差异无统计学意义.结论 掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板在桡骨远端骨折治疗中具有相同疗效.     

掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效的比较

目的 比较掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折的长期疗效.方法 对2005年9月-2007年11月间,采用切开复位掌侧锁定接骨板或普通接骨板内固定的45例随访资料完整的患者,进行两种疗法的比较.其中23例行锁定接骨板内固定,22例行普通接骨板内固定.按照AO分型:A型11例,B型11例,C型23例.随访内容包括:腕关节活动度(屈曲、背伸、尺偏、桡偏),前臂旋前、旋后活动范围,影像学资料(尺偏角、掌倾角、桡骨高度),应用DASH上肢功能评定标准和Gartland/Wertey腕关节评分法进行评分.结果 术后随访时间平均为18.8个月(12～36个月).腕关节活动度中,锁定板组背伸及两组的桡偏范围低于Gartland/Werley腕关节评分的基本范围.两组DASH值、腕关节活动度及前臂旋转范围,握力、捏力的恢复差异无统计学意义.Gartland/Werley腕关节评分普通接骨板治疗组优于锁定接骨板治疗组,差异有统计学意义.掌倾角均值两组都低于正常范围,尺偏角与桡骨高度均值在正常范围内,两组间差异无统计学意义.结论 掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板在桡骨远端骨折治疗中具有相同疗效.     

掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效的比较

目的 比较掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折的长期疗效.方法 对2005年9月-2007年11月间,采用切开复位掌侧锁定接骨板或普通接骨板内固定的45例随访资料完整的患者,进行两种疗法的比较.其中23例行锁定接骨板内固定,22例行普通接骨板内固定.按照AO分型:A型11例,B型11例,C型23例.随访内容包括:腕关节活动度(屈曲、背伸、尺偏、桡偏),前臂旋前、旋后活动范围,影像学资料(尺偏角、掌倾角、桡骨高度),应用DASH上肢功能评定标准和Gartland/Wertey腕关节评分法进行评分.结果 术后随访时间平均为18.8个月(12～36个月).腕关节活动度中,锁定板组背伸及两组的桡偏范围低于Gartland/Werley腕关节评分的基本范围.两组DASH值、腕关节活动度及前臂旋转范围,握力、捏力的恢复差异无统计学意义.Gartland/Werley腕关节评分普通接骨板治疗组优于锁定接骨板治疗组,差异有统计学意义.掌倾角均值两组都低于正常范围,尺偏角与桡骨高度均值在正常范围内,两组间差异无统计学意义.结论 掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板在桡骨远端骨折治疗中具有相同疗效.     

掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效的比较

目的 比较掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折的长期疗效.方法 对2005年9月-2007年11月间,采用切开复位掌侧锁定接骨板或普通接骨板内固定的45例随访资料完整的患者,进行两种疗法的比较.其中23例行锁定接骨板内固定,22例行普通接骨板内固定.按照AO分型:A型11例,B型11例,C型23例.随访内容包括:腕关节活动度(屈曲、背伸、尺偏、桡偏),前臂旋前、旋后活动范围,影像学资料(尺偏角、掌倾角、桡骨高度),应用DASH上肢功能评定标准和Gartland/Wertey腕关节评分法进行评分.结果 术后随访时间平均为18.8个月(12～36个月).腕关节活动度中,锁定板组背伸及两组的桡偏范围低于Gartland/Werley腕关节评分的基本范围.两组DASH值、腕关节活动度及前臂旋转范围,握力、捏力的恢复差异无统计学意义.Gartland/Werley腕关节评分普通接骨板治疗组优于锁定接骨板治疗组,差异有统计学意义.掌倾角均值两组都低于正常范围,尺偏角与桡骨高度均值在正常范围内,两组间差异无统计学意义.结论 掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板在桡骨远端骨折治疗中具有相同疗效.     

掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效的比较

目的 比较掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折的长期疗效.方法 对2005年9月-2007年11月间,采用切开复位掌侧锁定接骨板或普通接骨板内固定的45例随访资料完整的患者,进行两种疗法的比较.其中23例行锁定接骨板内固定,22例行普通接骨板内固定.按照AO分型:A型11例,B型11例,C型23例.随访内容包括:腕关节活动度(屈曲、背伸、尺偏、桡偏),前臂旋前、旋后活动范围,影像学资料(尺偏角、掌倾角、桡骨高度),应用DASH上肢功能评定标准和Gartland/Wertey腕关节评分法进行评分.结果 术后随访时间平均为18.8个月(12～36个月).腕关节活动度中,锁定板组背伸及两组的桡偏范围低于Gartland/Werley腕关节评分的基本范围.两组DASH值、腕关节活动度及前臂旋转范围,握力、捏力的恢复差异无统计学意义.Gartland/Werley腕关节评分普通接骨板治疗组优于锁定接骨板治疗组,差异有统计学意义.掌倾角均值两组都低于正常范围,尺偏角与桡骨高度均值在正常范围内,两组间差异无统计学意义.结论 掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板在桡骨远端骨折治疗中具有相同疗效.     

掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效的比较

目的 比较掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折的长期疗效.方法 对2005年9月-2007年11月间,采用切开复位掌侧锁定接骨板或普通接骨板内固定的45例随访资料完整的患者,进行两种疗法的比较.其中23例行锁定接骨板内固定,22例行普通接骨板内固定.按照AO分型:A型11例,B型11例,C型23例.随访内容包括:腕关节活动度(屈曲、背伸、尺偏、桡偏),前臂旋前、旋后活动范围,影像学资料(尺偏角、掌倾角、桡骨高度),应用DASH上肢功能评定标准和Gartland/Wertey腕关节评分法进行评分.结果 术后随访时间平均为18.8个月(12～36个月).腕关节活动度中,锁定板组背伸及两组的桡偏范围低于Gartland/Werley腕关节评分的基本范围.两组DASH值、腕关节活动度及前臂旋转范围,握力、捏力的恢复差异无统计学意义.Gartland/Werley腕关节评分普通接骨板治疗组优于锁定接骨板治疗组,差异有统计学意义.掌倾角均值两组都低于正常范围,尺偏角与桡骨高度均值在正常范围内,两组间差异无统计学意义.结论 掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板在桡骨远端骨折治疗中具有相同疗效.     

掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效的比较

目的 比较掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折的长期疗效.方法 对2005年9月-2007年11月间,采用切开复位掌侧锁定接骨板或普通接骨板内固定的45例随访资料完整的患者,进行两种疗法的比较.其中23例行锁定接骨板内固定,22例行普通接骨板内固定.按照AO分型:A型11例,B型11例,C型23例.随访内容包括:腕关节活动度(屈曲、背伸、尺偏、桡偏),前臂旋前、旋后活动范围,影像学资料(尺偏角、掌倾角、桡骨高度),应用DASH上肢功能评定标准和Gartland/Wertey腕关节评分法进行评分.结果 术后随访时间平均为18.8个月(12～36个月).腕关节活动度中,锁定板组背伸及两组的桡偏范围低于Gartland/Werley腕关节评分的基本范围.两组DASH值、腕关节活动度及前臂旋转范围,握力、捏力的恢复差异无统计学意义.Gartland/Werley腕关节评分普通接骨板治疗组优于锁定接骨板治疗组,差异有统计学意义.掌倾角均值两组都低于正常范围,尺偏角与桡骨高度均值在正常范围内,两组间差异无统计学意义.结论 掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板在桡骨远端骨折治疗中具有相同疗效.     

掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效的比较

目的 比较掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折的长期疗效.方法 对2005年9月-2007年11月间,采用切开复位掌侧锁定接骨板或普通接骨板内固定的45例随访资料完整的患者,进行两种疗法的比较.其中23例行锁定接骨板内固定,22例行普通接骨板内固定.按照AO分型:A型11例,B型11例,C型23例.随访内容包括:腕关节活动度(屈曲、背伸、尺偏、桡偏),前臂旋前、旋后活动范围,影像学资料(尺偏角、掌倾角、桡骨高度),应用DASH上肢功能评定标准和Gartland/Wertey腕关节评分法进行评分.结果 术后随访时间平均为18.8个月(12～36个月).腕关节活动度中,锁定板组背伸及两组的桡偏范围低于Gartland/Werley腕关节评分的基本范围.两组DASH值、腕关节活动度及前臂旋转范围,握力、捏力的恢复差异无统计学意义.Gartland/Werley腕关节评分普通接骨板治疗组优于锁定接骨板治疗组,差异有统计学意义.掌倾角均值两组都低于正常范围,尺偏角与桡骨高度均值在正常范围内,两组间差异无统计学意义.结论 掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板在桡骨远端骨折治疗中具有相同疗效.     

掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效的比较

目的 比较掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折的长期疗效.方法 对2005年9月-2007年11月间,采用切开复位掌侧锁定接骨板或普通接骨板内固定的45例随访资料完整的患者,进行两种疗法的比较.其中23例行锁定接骨板内固定,22例行普通接骨板内固定.按照AO分型:A型11例,B型11例,C型23例.随访内容包括:腕关节活动度(屈曲、背伸、尺偏、桡偏),前臂旋前、旋后活动范围,影像学资料(尺偏角、掌倾角、桡骨高度),应用DASH上肢功能评定标准和Gartland/Wertey腕关节评分法进行评分.结果 术后随访时间平均为18.8个月(12～36个月).腕关节活动度中,锁定板组背伸及两组的桡偏范围低于Gartland/Werley腕关节评分的基本范围.两组DASH值、腕关节活动度及前臂旋转范围,握力、捏力的恢复差异无统计学意义.Gartland/Werley腕关节评分普通接骨板治疗组优于锁定接骨板治疗组,差异有统计学意义.掌倾角均值两组都低于正常范围,尺偏角与桡骨高度均值在正常范围内,两组间差异无统计学意义.结论 掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板在桡骨远端骨折治疗中具有相同疗效.     

掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效的比较

目的 比较掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折的长期疗效.方法 对2005年9月-2007年11月间,采用切开复位掌侧锁定接骨板或普通接骨板内固定的45例随访资料完整的患者,进行两种疗法的比较.其中23例行锁定接骨板内固定,22例行普通接骨板内固定.按照AO分型:A型11例,B型11例,C型23例.随访内容包括:腕关节活动度(屈曲、背伸、尺偏、桡偏),前臂旋前、旋后活动范围,影像学资料(尺偏角、掌倾角、桡骨高度),应用DASH上肢功能评定标准和Gartland/Wertey腕关节评分法进行评分.结果 术后随访时间平均为18.8个月(12～36个月).腕关节活动度中,锁定板组背伸及两组的桡偏范围低于Gartland/Werley腕关节评分的基本范围.两组DASH值、腕关节活动度及前臂旋转范围,握力、捏力的恢复差异无统计学意义.Gartland/Werley腕关节评分普通接骨板治疗组优于锁定接骨板治疗组,差异有统计学意义.掌倾角均值两组都低于正常范围,尺偏角与桡骨高度均值在正常范围内,两组间差异无统计学意义.结论 掌侧锁定接骨板与普通接骨板在桡骨远端骨折治疗中具有相同疗效.     

Comparison of treatment of unstable intra articular fractures of distal radius with locking plate versus non-locking plate fixation

Introduction

Unstable intra articular fractures of distal radius are frequently being managed with open reduction and internal fixation. Of late in some biomechanical studies locking plates have been shown to be better in terms of maintenance of radiological parameters in comparison to non-locking plates. We conducted this study to know whether this biomechanical superiority of locking plates is converted in to better clinical outcomes.

Materials and methods

A study was conducted in 60 patients (30 in each group) with unstable intra articular fractures of distal radius who were treated by open reduction and internal fixation with locking plates and non-locking plates. Patients were evaluated for radiological parameters (intra articular step off, radial height, radial tilt, volar tilt) and functional parameters (flexion, extension, radial deviation, ulnar deviation, pronation, supination grip strength) at two year follow up. Overall outcome was evaluated by scoring systems of Gartland and Werley and modified Green O'' Brien.

Results

The change in radiological parameters from immediate post op to latest at two year in locking plate group was not significant for radial height, radial tilt, volar tilt, but ulnar variance whereas in non-locking plate there was significant change in radial height, volar tilt, ulnar variance but no significant change in radial inclination. In clinical and functional outcome no significant difference was found at two year follow up.

Conclusions

Locking plates maintain the radiological parameters better than non-locking plates but functional outcome are same for both plates at two year after surgery.     

A comparison of bone union and complication rates between locking and non-locking plates in distal fibular fracture: Retrospective study of 106 cases

BackgroundAnkle fractures represents the third most frequent fracture in elderly patients. There is a current tendency to fix long bones fractures with locking plates. However, we rarely find published accounts about the use of locking plates in distal fibula fractures, except for biomechanical ones, studying human cadaveric fibula.ObjectivesThe main objective was to compare radiographic bone union rates at 6 and 12 weeks of follow up, then wound complications and hardware removal rates, and construct cost.Study Design & MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 105 patients who underwent surgery with locking plates or non-locking plates over a two-year period, out of which 42 patients were treated with non-locking plates (VIVES™ - Stryker^Ⓡ) and 63 with locking plates (VariAx™ - Stryker^Ⓡ,). We analyzed bone union on anterior posterior and lateral X-rays of the ankle. We collected data of wound complications and hardware removal from patient records. Multiple linear regression techniques were performed after identifying dependent variables.ResultsThere was no significant difference between non-locking and locking plates in the radiographic bone union rate of distal fibula, respectively at 6 and 12 post-operative weeks (85.71% vs. 81%; p = 0.525 and 97.62% vs. 96.83%; p = 1). No significant difference was found in the wound complication rate between the two groups (11.9% vs. 11.12%; p = 0.9). No significant differences were found in the hardware removal rate, either with or without operative site's infection (respectively: 30.95% vs. 39.68%; p = 0.361 and 21.42% vs. 38.09%; p = 0.071). Cost efficiency is in the favor of non-locking plates.ConclusionNon-locking constructs are as effective as locking constructs in the treatment of displaced distal fibula fractures at a substantially lower cost. High-quality randomized controlled trials are needed in the future to verify the finding of this study.     

T型锁定加压接骨板与远端万向锁定加压接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折的疗效分析

目的 比较使用T型锁定加压接骨板和远端万向锁定加压接骨板在治疗桡骨远端骨折时的手术疗效.方法 回顾性分析2011年12月-2015年11月于首都医科大学附属北京友谊医院骨科分别采用T型锁定加压接骨板与远端万向锁定加压接骨板治疗桡骨远端骨折的118例患者病例资料.T型锁定加压接骨板组60例;按AO/OTA分型,其中A3型3例,B2型5例,B3型7例,C1型10例,C2型20例,C3型15例.远端万向锁定加压双柱接骨板组58例;按AO/OTA分型,其中A3型1例,B2型2例,B3型4例,C1型15例,C2型18例,C3型18例.分析对比两组术后影像学参数、功能恢复情况.随访以门诊随访进行.掌倾角、尺偏角、桡骨高度、腕关节背伸、掌屈、尺偏、桡偏、旋前、旋后角度以及Gartland-Werley功能评分用均数±标准差((x)±s)表示,组间比较行￡检验.结果 所有患者术后均得到随访,T型锁定加压接骨板组平均随访时间26.5个月,远端万向锁定加压双柱接骨板组平均随访时间25.6个月.结果显示,在尺偏角、桡骨高度、桡偏角度以及Gartland-Werley功能评分方面两组间差异无统计学意义,在掌倾角、腕关节背伸、掌屈、尺偏、旋前、旋后角度方面两组间差异有统计学意义,远端万向锁定加压接骨板具有优势.结论 采用两种内固定手术方式治疗桡骨远端骨折均获得满意的临床疗效,远端万向锁定加压接骨板更具有优势,临床手术应用可根据患者具体情况选择相应的内固定方式.     

A randomized comparison of locking and non-locking palmar plating for unstable Colles' fractures in the elderly

This study compared the effectiveness of locking and non-locking palmar plating for unstable Colles' fractures in the elderly. The patients treated with locking plates included 4 men and 18 women with a mean age of 68 years (Group A) and those treated with non-locking plates included 3 men and 28 women with a mean age of 74 years (Group B). Radiographic parameters, including palmar tilt, radial inclination and radial length were measured before surgery, after surgery and at final followup. There were no significant differences in respect of any of the radiographic parameters between the two groups pre-operatively. After surgery, all of the radiographic parameters were improved in both groups and there were no significant differences between the two groups at final followup.     

Increased rates of wound complications with locking plates in distal fibular fractures

Introduction

There is a growing use of locking compression plates in fracture surgery. The current study was undertaken to investigate the wound complication rates of locking versus non-locking plates in distal fibular fractures.

Patients and methods

During a 6-year study period all consecutive, closed distal fibular fractures treated with either a locking or a non-locking plate were included and retrospectively analysed for complication related to the fibula.

Results

A total of 165 patients received a one-third tubular plate and 40 patients were treated with a locking plate. The two groups were comparable with respect to patient characteristics (age, gender, smokers and diabetics), injury characteristics (affected side, fracture dislocations, number of fractured malleoli and classification) and operation characteristics (surgical delay and duration, use of a tourniquet and plate length). The wound complication rate was 5.5% in the conventional plating group, and 17.5% in the locking plate group (p = 0.019). This difference was largely due to an increase in major complications, for which removal of the plate was necessary (p = 0.008).

Conclusion

There is a significant increase in wound complications in distal fibular fractures treated with a locking compression plate. In light of the current study, we would caution against the application of the currently used locking compression plates in the treatment of distal fibular fractures.     

锁定加压接骨板与外固定支架治疗桡骨远端粉碎性骨折的疗效比较

目的 比较锁定加压接骨板与外固定支架治疗桡骨远端粉碎性骨折的临床疗效.方法 对40例桡骨远端粉碎性骨折患者,采用掌侧锁定加压接骨板和外固定支架治疗;其中21例行掌侧锁定加压接骨板,19例行外固定支架.按AO/ASIF分型:C1型10例,C2型15例,C3型15例.随访内容包括测量腕关节活动度,前臂旋转活动度,握力、捏力及相关影像学资料(掌倾角、尺偏角、桡骨高度).按上肢功能评定标准(Disabilities of the Arm,Shoulder and Hand,DASH)和Gartland-Werley腕关节评分标准进行综合评估.对随访数据进行统计学分析,比较两组的治疗效果.结果 术后随访时间为6～48个月,平均18.8个月.根据Gartland-Werley腕关节评分标准评定,锁定加压接骨板治疗组优良率为81.0%,外固定支架治疗组优良率为78.9%.两组在掌曲、背伸、桡偏、旋前、旋后、握力、捏力、掌倾角、尺偏角、桡骨高度等方面,Gartland-Werley腕关节评分和DASH值差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05);锁定接骨板组的腕尺偏活动度小于外固定支架组,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).锁定接骨板治疗组中无并发症出现.外固定支架治疗组中1例反射性交感神经营养不良症,药物治疗和理疗后好转;1例钉道感染,局部换药后治愈.结论 采用掌侧锁定加压接骨板和外固定支架治疗桡骨远端粉碎性骨折具有相同效果,具体可根据骨折类型、患者的功能要求及经济情况选择手术方案.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the treatment outcomes between locking compression plate and external fixator for treating severely comminuted distal radius fracture. Methods Forty patients of severely comminuted distal radius fractures were treated with either locking compression plate fixation via a volar approach or external fixator. Twenty-one patients were treated with locking compression plate fixation, while the other 19 patients were treated with external fixator. According to AO/ASIF classification, there were 10 type C1 fractures,15 type C2 fractures and 15 type C3 fractures.Wrist range of motion, forearm range of motion, grip and pinch strength, radiographic data (palmar tilt, radial inclination, radial height), scores by the Disabilities of the Arm,Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and by Gartland-Werley were collected at follow-up. The data were statistically analyzed to compare the clinical effects. Results Postoperative follow-up ranged from 6 to 48 months with an average of 18.8 months. According to Gartland-Werley wrist score, the excellent and good rate was 81.0% in the locking compression plate group, and 78.9% in the external fixator group. No significantly difference was detected in the ROM of flexion, extension, radial deviation, pronation, supination, grip and pinch strength, the parameter of palmar inclination, ulnar inclination and radial height and in Gartland-Werley score and DASH score between the two groups (P＞0.05). The ROM of unlar deviation in the locking compression plate group was significantly smaller than that in the external fixation group ( P＜0.05). No complication occurred in the locking compression plate group. One patient developed sympathetic reflex dystrophy postoperatively in the external fixation group. After medication and physical therapy the symptoms had resolved. Infection of the external fixator pin tract was note in another patient which was effectively treated by wound care. Conclusion Locking compression plate and external fixator lead to siunilar treatment outcomes for severely cormminuted distal radius fractures. Patient's functional requirement, age and financial status should be taken into consideration while choosing one of these procedures.     

Ist die Behandlung der instabilen distalen Radiusfraktur beim älteren Menschen mittels Fixateur externe nicht mehr indiziert?

BACKGROUND: In recent years there has been an increasingly marked shift in the operative treatment of unstable fractures of the distal radius. The introduction of locking compression plates has made it possible to extend the indications for palmar stabilisation according to the principles of internal fixation to extension fractures even in osteoporotic bone, and since then the new design has been used more and more widely. First clinical results show very good and good clinical and radiological outcomes in over 80% of cases after locking compression plate osteosynthesis. All this raises the question of whether external fixation is no longer indicated for distal radius fractures in the elderly, or is now no more than a second-line treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Within a 5-year period, 67 patients over 65 years of age were identified among 220 who had had unstable fractures of the distal radius in our hospital with external fixation. The average follow-up period (clinical and radiological examinations) was 37 months. We devoted particular attention to the analysis of complications and problems during the treatment. RESULTS: Complete bone healing was observed in all patients treated with external fixation. In most cases, complications were minor pin-track infections (10%). The radiological follow-up examination revealed radial shortening by an average of 2 mm and an average radial shift of 0.2 mm. The joint angle was 2.5 degrees with lateral irradiation and 18 degrees with dorso-palmar irradiation. According to the Gartland and Werley score, the functional, radiological and subjective outcome was excellent or good in 87% of these patients. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, internal fixation with angular fixed plates has definite benefits. The medium- and long-term follow-up and functional outcome still show no benefits over external fixation, however. External fixation is a genuine option, even if as second-line treatment.     

掌侧锁定接骨板与外固定架固定治疗不稳定桡骨远端关节内骨折的疗效比较

目的比较掌侧锁定接骨板与外固定架固定治疗不稳定桡骨远端关节内骨折的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析自2015-01—2018-03诊治的78例不稳定桡骨远端关节内骨折,47例采用掌侧锁定接骨板固定手术治疗(锁定板组),31例采用外固定架手术治疗(外固定组)。比较2组手术时间、并发症情况,以及末次随访时关节塌陷情况、DASH评分、Gartland-Werley评分、握力、屈曲度、背伸度、旋前度、旋后度、桡侧倾斜度、尺侧倾斜度。结果 78例均顺利完成手术,随访时间12~32个月,平均16.2个月。锁定板组手术时间较外固定组长,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。2组并发症情况比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。末次随访时2组DASH评分、Gartland-Werley评分、握力、腕关节背伸度、旋后度、桡侧倾斜度以及尺侧倾斜度比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);锁定板组在屈曲度、旋前度表现较外固定组更好,关节塌陷数较外固定组少,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论掌侧锁定接骨板手术治疗不稳定性桡骨远端关节内骨折能更好地恢复腕关节的屈曲和旋前功能,维持关节面平整性,但并不能减少并发症以及获得更好的功能评分;医师应综合考虑骨折分型、关节面塌陷以及患者的需求,选择合适的手术方法。     

桡背侧双锁定钢板治疗桡骨远端不稳定骨折

目的 探讨桡背侧双锁定钢板治疗桡骨远端骨折的临床疗效。方法 2007年3月至2009年12月采用桡背侧双锁定钢板治疗22例桡骨远端不稳定骨折患者,男12例,女10例;平均年龄47.5岁(21 ～ 78岁)。骨折AO分型：A3型1例;B2型5例;C1型2例,C2型11例,C3型3例。其中5例术中采用自体髂骨植骨。术后评估包括影像学测量尺偏角、掌倾角及桡骨高度,关节活动范围,握力测量,肩臂手功能丧失量表( DASH)评分,以及Gartland-Werley量表评分。结果 22例患者术后获平均19个月（12～32个月）随访。所钉患者骨折均在术后6个月内（2～6个月）获愈合。影像学测量尺偏角平均为25.3°(22°～29°),掌倾角平均为12.1 °(8°～14°),桡骨高度平均为1.1 cm(0.8 ～ 1.3 cm)。Stewart改良评分的优良率为90.9％。关节活动范围：背伸平均为53°(30°～68°),掌屈平均为47°(32°～65°),尺偏平均为22°(16°～ 30°),桡偏平均为14°(11°～ 32°),旋前平均为76°(30°～ 90°),旋后平均为72°(10°～ 90°)。以健侧为参考,术侧握力平均为72％ (15 kg)。DASH评分平均为11.4分（0～70分）,Gartland-Werley量表评分平均为3.4分（1～16分）。结论 桡背侧双锁定钢板治疗桡骨远端不稳定骨折临床疗效较好,尤其是对于背侧皮质粉碎严重的患者,能够为骨折提供更加牢固的支撑。     

两种内固定治疗桡骨远端骨折伴尺骨茎突基底部骨折的疗效比较

目的比较采用桡骨远端掌侧锁定钢板+尺骨茎突单皮质骨螺钉固定和单纯桡骨远端掌侧锁定钢板治疗桡骨远端骨折伴尺骨茎突基底部骨折的疗效。方法将73例桡骨远端骨折伴尺骨茎突基底部骨折患者按治疗方法的不同分为观察组(采用桡骨远端掌侧锁定钢板+尺骨茎突单皮质骨螺钉固定治疗,38例)和对照组(采用单纯桡骨远端掌侧锁定钢板治疗,35例)。测量桡骨远端掌倾角、尺偏角、桡骨高度。术后4个月采用Dienst功能评分标准评价临床疗效。末次随访时采用腕关节活动度评价腕关节功能恢复情况。结果患者均获得随访,时间9~16个月。术后掌倾角、尺偏角、桡骨高度两组比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后4个月采用Dienst功能评分标准评价临床疗效的优良率,观察组明显高于对照组(P<0.05)。末次随访时两组腕关节功能均已恢复。结论与采用单纯桡骨远端掌侧锁定钢板治疗相比,桡骨远端掌侧锁定钢板+尺骨茎突单皮质骨螺钉固定治疗桡骨远端骨折伴尺骨茎突基底部骨折更利于改善患者临床症状,更利于恢复腕关节的稳定性。