寰枢椎后路柔性固定的生物力学研究

目的分析细棒、PEEK棒固定对寰枢关节稳定性的影响。方法采用6具新鲜成人枕骨(occipital bone,Oc)~颈椎C4节段进行测试,模拟以下手术及固定状态:①完整状态;②损伤状态:枢椎齿状突II型骨折;③坚强固定:寰枢椎均采用普通椎弓根螺钉固定,直径3.5 mm钛棒连接;④PEEK棒:直径3.5 mm的PEEK棒连接;⑤细棒:直径2.0 mm钛棒连接。采用重复测量实验设计,在完整、损伤和不同的固定状态下,通过脊柱试验机对标本分别施加1.5 N·m的前屈/后伸、左/右侧弯和左/右轴向旋转的纯力偶矩。采用Optotrak三维运动测量系统连续采集标本运动,分析寰枢椎之间角度运动范围和中性区。结果采用直径3.5 mm的钛棒,2.0 mm的细棒以及3.5 mm的PEEK棒固定后,在前屈、后伸、侧弯和旋转方向上均显著减小了固定节段的运动范围(P<0.05)。直径3.5 mm和2.0 mm的棒固定后的运动范围,在各个方向上无显著性差异。PEEK棒固定的运动范围仅在侧弯方向上大于坚强固定(P=0.005),其他方向无显著性差异。3种固定方式在屈伸、侧弯和旋转方向上均显著减小了固定节段的中性区(P<0.05)。各种固定方式之间相比较,无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论在寰枢关节采用直径2.0 mm的细棒固定,与坚强固定的稳定性相当。采用直径3.5 mm的PEEK棒固定,在前屈、后伸、旋转方向上与坚强固定的稳定性相当,在侧弯方向上弱于坚强固定。     

Prior surgical fixation of proximal humerus fractures is associated with increased complications following subsequent reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to compare complication rates between patients undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) after a prior open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for proximal humerus fracture (PHF) to those undergoing RSA as a primary treatment for PHFs, glenohumeral osteoarthritis, or rotator cuff tear arthropathy (CTA).MethodsPatients who underwent RSA between 2015 and 2020 were identified in the Mariner database. Patients were separated into 3 mutually exclusive groups: (1) RSA for osteoarthritis, rotator cuff tear, or CTA (Control-RSA); (2) RSA as a primary treatment for PHF (PHF-RSA); and (3) RSA for patients with prior ORIF of PHFs (ORIF-RSA). Ninety-day medical and 2-year postoperative surgical complications were identified. In addition, patients in the PHF-RSA group were subdivided into those undergoing RSA for PHF within 3 months of the fracture (acute) vs. those treated greater than 3 months from diagnosis (delayed). Multivariate regression was performed to control for differences in comorbidities and demographics.ResultsA total of 30,824 patients underwent primary RSA for arthritis or CTA, 5389 patients underwent RSA as a primary treatment for a PHF, and 361 patients underwent RSA after ORIF of a PHF. ORIF before RSA was associated with an increased risk of overall revision (odds ratio [OR] 2.45, P = .002), infection (OR 2.40, P < .001), instability (OR 2.43, P < .001), fracture (OR 3.24, P = .001), minor medical complications (OR 1.59, P = .008), and readmission (OR 2.55, P = .001) compared with the Control-RSA cohort. RSA as a primary treatment for PHF was associated with an increased risk of 2-year revision (OR 1.60, P < .001), infection (OR 1.51, P < .001), instability (OR 2.84, P < .001), and fracture (OR 2.54, P < .001) in addition to major medical complications (OR 2.02, P < .001), minor medical complications (OR 1.92, P < .001), 90-day emergency department visits (OR 1.26, P < .001) and 90-day readmission (OR 2.03, P < .001) compared with the Control-RSA cohort. The ORIF-RSA group had an increased risk of periprosthetic infection (OR 1.94, P = .002) when compared with the PHF-RSA cohort. There were no differences in medical or surgical complications in the RSA-PHF cohort between patients treated in an acute or delayed fashion.ConclusionRSA following ORIF of a PHF is associated with increased complications compared with patients undergoing RSA for nonfracture indications. Prior ORIF of a PHF is also an independent risk factor for postoperative infection after RSA compared with patients who undergo RSA as a primary operation for fracture. The timing of RSA as a primary operation for PHF does not appear to impact the rates of postoperative medical and surgical complications.     

脊柱后路内固定术后硬膜外血肿的预防与护理体会

目的 探讨脊柱后路内固定术后硬膜外血肿的预防与护理体会。方法 遵照回顾性分析法选择我院2013年2 月～2018 年2 月纳入的60 例脊柱后路内固定术患者，依照不同理疗方式进行分组。其中30 例给予常规药物治疗作为对照组，另30 例除了常规治疗之外实施综合护理作为研究组，记录两组硬膜外血肿、腰椎术后血肿及颈椎术后血肿发生率，分别在干预前后进行生活质量评分（QOL）调查，出院时发放满意度调查问卷表，对比两组干预结果。结果 研究组血肿发生率为6.67%，明显低于对照组的20.00%（P＜0.05）。干预前两组的食欲、精神、睡眠、疼痛及日常生活评分相比差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05），干预后研究组的各项评分均高于对照组（P＜0.05）。研究组对干预效果的满意度为90.00%，明显高于对照组的76.67%（P＜0.05）。结论 护理干预运用于脊柱后路内固定中效果显著，能够有效减少硬膜外血肿的发生率，提升生活质量，促进病情稳定，患者满意度较高，可维持良好医患关系。     

The Outcome of Cemented Acetabular Components in Total Hip Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis Defines a Proficiency Threshold: Results of 22,956 Cases From the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry

BackgroundThe declining popularity of cemented acetabular components is incongruous, given the published results of prostheses implanted using contemporary techniques. The outcome of arthroplasty has previously been demonstrated to correlate with surgeon experience and volume of practice. We aim to explore if surgeon volume alters outcomes of cemented acetabular components based on survivorship data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR).MethodsAn observational study was undertaken using a cohort of 22,956 patients with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis in the period 2003-2016 in whom cemented acetabular components were implanted. The cohort was stratified by age (greater than or less than 65 years) and annualized surgical volume of ≤10, >10-≤25, and >25 cases.ResultsStratified by age and volume, there was a protective benefit against revision conveyed at volume thresholds of 10 cases per annum and 25 cases per annum for patients ≥65 years of age and <65 years of age, respectively.ConclusionCemented total hip arthroplasty has excellent survivorship out to 15 years based on AOANJRR data. This survivorship is further improved if surgeons perform a higher volume of cases, with >25 cases conferring the greatest benefit. The AOANJRR data set is used to define best practice; surgeons who choose to utilize cemented acetabular fixation should be encouraged to perform this technique in adequate volumes to minimize revision risk and ensure the preservation of this important surgical skill set.     

股骨近端空心锁定板内固定治疗股骨颈骨折临床疗效观察

目的：：研究股骨近端空心锁定板内固定治疗股骨颈骨折的临床效果。方法：对2008年2月至2010年4月我院入院治疗的108例股骨颈骨折患者进行了研究，随机分为两组，对照组给与空心钉进行治疗，观察组采用股骨近端空心锁定板内固定治疗，比较两组治疗方案的手术时间、出血量、住院时间以及下床时间，比较两组治疗方案的手术并发症发生率，并比较两组患者三年期临床疗效。结果：观察组患者手术出血量明显少于对照组，手术时间、住院时间以及下床时间明显短于对照组，两组比较差异明显，有统计学意义( P<0.05)；两组患者手术并发症均以疼痛、骨不连以及感染为主，其中观察组上述并发症的发生率为13.0％，明显低于对照组33.3％，两组比较差异有统计学意义( P<0.05)；观察组患者三年临床总有效率为79.6％，对照组患者三年期临床总有效率为51.9％，两组比较差异明显，有统计学意义( P<0.05)。结论：股骨近端空心锁定板内固定治疗股骨颈骨折临床效果显著，可以明显缩短手术时间以及住院时间，降低手术并发症，并且三年临床总有效率更高，值得临床推广应用。     

单侧外固定治疗重度Pilon骨折的临床疗效探究

目的探讨单侧外固定治疗重度Pilon骨折的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2017年6月-2018年12月南京中大医院江北院区骨科收治的重度Pilon骨折患者100例,男性54例,女性46例;年龄18~65岁,平均35.5岁;Ruedi-AllgowerⅡ型39例,Ⅲ型61例。按照不同固定方法分为常规固定组和单侧外固定组,各50例,比较两组患者住院时间、完全负重下地时间、骨折愈合时间,评价治疗前及治疗后3个月踝关节活动度、踝关节功能恢复情况、疼痛程度,并统计患者的治疗效果及并发症发生情况。结果单侧外固定组住院时间、完全负重下地时间、骨折愈合时间分别为(16.50±1.50)d、(132.56±10.25)d、(14.16±0.69)周,均短于常规固定组(19.25±2.35)d、(198.65±16.58)d、(17.58±1.50)周(t/P=6.975/0.001、23.970/0.001、14.650/0.001)。治疗后3个月,单侧外固定组踝关节Mazur评分为(85.67±6.59)分,显著高于常规固定组(62.78±3.45)分,VAS评分为(2.23±0.36)分,低于常规固定组(4.59±0.89)分(t/P=21.760/0.001、17.380/0.001);单侧外固定组患者踝关节活动度分别为(17.29±0.16)°、(28.36±1.23)°、(19.68±0.16)°、(16.89±2.12)°,均高于常规固定组(10.62±1.25)°、(21.57±2.58)°、(14.36±1.62)°、(14.25±0.57)°(t/P=37.430/0.001、16.800/0.001、23.110/0.001、8.503/0.001)。单侧外固定组治疗优良率为90.00%,显著高于常规固定组74.00%(χ^2/P=4.336/0.037)。单侧外固定组总并发症发生率为4.00%,显著低于常规固定组的18.00%(χ^2/P=5.005/0.025)。结论单侧外固定支架治疗重度Pilon骨折可有效减轻患者疼痛症状,提高患者踝关节活动度,恢复患者功能,治疗效果显著,安全性较高。     

解剖锁定钢板联合同种异体腓骨治疗肱骨近端骨折疗效的Meta分析

文题释义：肱骨近端骨折：肱骨近端包括肱骨头及大结节、小结节，中老年人骨质疏松及低能量损伤可导致肱骨近端骨折。 同种异体腓骨：取自于人体异体，经过加工处理，去除其免疫原性，保留其骨性结构，可用于移植修复骨缺损，起到支撑作用。 背景：肱骨近端骨折是临床常见骨折，但对肱骨近端内侧柱缺乏支撑的骨折目前仍是治疗难点，并发症常见，失败率较高。 目的：比较解剖锁定钢板联合同种异体腓骨与单纯解剖锁定钢板治疗肱骨近端骨折的疗效。 方法：使用计算机检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、Google Scholar、中国知网、万方、维普数据库，检索时间均从建库到2020年2月。检索国内外关于对比研究解剖锁定钢板联合同种异体腓骨与单纯解剖锁定钢板治疗肱骨近端骨折疗效的文献。2名研究员根据纳入和排除标准分别独立筛选文献，提取数据，评估文献中的偏倚风险。纳入12篇相关文献使用RevMan 5.2软件将以下指标进行Meta分析，包括影像学数据、功能评分和并发症。结果与结论：①通过文献检索、根据纳入和排除标准，12篇文献纳入研究，其中11篇为回顾性队列研究，1篇为随机对照研究；纳入研究文献质量高，但GRADE证据质量级别较低。②共纳入958例患者，其中解剖锁定钢板联合同种异体腓骨组411例，单纯解剖锁定钢板组547例；③Meta分析结果显示，解剖锁定钢板联合同种异体腓骨组术后1年肱骨头高度差值(MD=-2.40，95%CI：-2.49至-2.31)、颈干角差值(MD= -6.14，95%CI：-6.62至-5.67)、目测类比评分(MD=-0.22，95%CI：-0.35至-0.08)、肩关节功能评分(MD=4.12，95%CI：2.18-6.06)，上肢伤残评分(MD=-10.32，95%CI：-13.44至-7.19)、术后2年的目测类比评分(MD=-0.37，95%CI：-0.55至-0.19)、肩关节功能评分(MD=5.07，95%CI：2.86-7.27)、总体并发症(OR=0.31，95%CI：0.20-0.48)及肱骨头螺钉切出(OR=0.25，95%CI：0.11-0.55)均明显优于单纯解剖锁定钢板组(P < 0.05)，肱骨头坏死(OR=0.94，95%CI：0.47-1.88)，两组间差异无显著性意义(P > 0.05)；④因此，较弱的证据提示，肱骨近端解剖锁定钢板联合同种异体腓骨治疗肱骨近端骨折的短期疗效优于解剖锁定钢板，可减少并发症的发生，促进功能恢复。ORCID: 0000-0002-8486-3932(阳运康) 中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：人工关节；骨植入物；脊柱；骨折；内固定；数字化骨科；组织工程