不同手术方法治疗复杂胫骨平台骨折临床疗效观察

目的探讨不同手术方法治疗复杂胫骨平台骨折临床疗效。方法选择2016年1月—2018年12月84例复杂胫骨平台骨折患者,随机分组。单侧锁定钢板内固定组选择单侧锁定钢板内固定手术,双侧切口双侧解剖钢板内固定组选择双侧切口双侧解剖钢板内固定。分析手术操作时间、手术失血、平均住院天数以及复杂胫骨平台骨折愈合时间;治疗前后患者视觉模拟评分和Rasmussen膝关节功能评分;膝关节僵硬发生率。结果双侧切口双侧解剖钢板内固定组视觉模拟评分和Rasmussen膝关节功能评分、手术操作时间、手术失血、平均住院天数以及复杂胫骨平台骨折愈合时间、膝关节僵硬发生率和单侧锁定钢板内固定组比较有优势,P<0.05。结论复杂胫骨平台骨折患者实施双侧切口双侧解剖钢板内固定可获得较好效果。     

关节镜双后内入路与切开手术治疗急性单纯后交叉韧带胫骨止点撕脱骨折早期疗效对比

目的:比较关节镜双后内入路与切开手术治疗急性单纯后交叉韧带胫骨止点撕脱骨折的疗效差异。方法:回顾性分析2016年6月至2020年6月经手术治疗的52例急性单纯性后交叉韧带胫骨止点撕脱骨折患者的临床资料,按手术方案不同分为两组,关节镜组27例患者行关节镜双后内入路手术治疗,其中男16例,女11例,年龄19~52(34.9±9.2)岁;切开复位组25例患者行膝关节后内侧切口手术治疗,其中男14例,女11例,年龄18~54(33.7±8.4)岁。观察并比较两组患者手术时间、切口长度、术中出血量、住院时间、住院费用、术后愈合情况、并发症以及术后12个月Lysholm、IKDC评分。结果:两组患者均顺利完成手术,无血管、神经损伤。52例均获得随访,时间6~24(15.0±1.7)个月。关节镜组手术时间、住院费用大于切开复位组(P<0.05);关节镜组术中出血量、切口长度、住院时间小于切开复位组(P<0.05);关节镜组和切开复位组术后12个月Lysholm评分分别为(95.9±1.7)分和(86.4±1.2)分,均较术前的(49.1±2.3)分和(48.9±1.1)分显著提高(P<0.05);关节镜组和切开复位组术后12个月IKDC总分分别为(96.9±1.5)分和(87.1±1.4)分,均较术前的(47.6±4.1)分和(48.1±3.9)分显著提高(P<0.05);关节镜组术后12个月膝关节Lysholm、IKDC评分均高于切开复位组(P<0.05)。结论:关节镜双后内入路治疗急性单纯后交叉韧带胫骨止点撕脱骨折,早期效果满意,疗效优于传统开放手术,具有创伤小、恢复快、操作简便等优点。     

胫骨平台后外侧柱骨折手术患者发生切口感染的手术室相关因素及对策分析

目的探讨胫骨平台后外侧柱骨折手术患者发生切口感染的手术室相关因素及对策分析。方法选择2015年1月～2018年6月在我院治疗的胫骨平台后外侧柱骨折的患者383例的临床资料进行回顾性分析,根据术后是否发生切口感染分为感染组(n=36)与非感染组(n=347)。统计切口病原菌分布情况,分析影响患者术后切口感染手术室相关因素,并探讨预防对策。结果 36例患者共分离出病原菌48株。革兰阳性菌比例最高,占66.7%,其中金黄色葡萄球菌构成比最高,其次为表皮葡萄球菌。革兰阴性菌中铜绿假单胞菌是主要菌株,分离出1例真菌。多因素分析结果显示:急诊手术、有参观人员、接台手术、手术时间≥3 h是胫骨平台后外侧柱骨折患者术后切口感染的独立危险因素,而层流室是保护因素(P0.05)。结论胫骨平台后外侧柱骨折手术患者术后切口感染的手术室相关因素包括急诊手术、有参观人员、接台手术、手术时间≥3 h,应加强手术室相关管理,采取必要的措施,降低术后切口感染风险。     

关节镜引导下复位内固定治疗胫骨平台骨折的疗效和对患者膝关节功能恢复及生活质量的影响

目的研究关节镜引导下复位内固定对胫骨平台骨折(FTP)患者的疗效和膝关节功能恢复及生活质量的影响。方法选取该院2016年8月-2018年3月收治的FTP患者104例,采用随机数字法将其分为观察组和对照组,每组52例。观察组行膝关节镜辅助切开复位内固定术,对照组患者行传统切开复位内固定术。比较两组患者的手术指标(切口长度、出血量、手术用时、术后引流量及下床时间)、骨生化指标[Ca~(2+)、降钙素(CT)、骨形态发生蛋白(BMP)和骨特异性碱性磷酸酶(NBAP)]、治疗疗效、膝关节功能Lysholm评分、生活质量SF-36评分和并发症发生情况。结果治疗前,两组患者骨生化指标、膝关节功能Lysholm评分、生活质量SF-36评分均无明显差异(P0.05)。治疗后,观察组切口长度、出血量、术后引流量、下床时间、NBAP明显少于对照组(P 0.01),观察组手术时间、Ca~(2+)、CT、BMP水平、Lysholm评分和SF-36评分均明显高于对照组(P 0.01)。观察组治疗有效率为90.38%,明显高于对照组80.77%(P 0.01)。观察组并发症发生率为11.54%,明显低于对照组28.84%(χ~2=4.69,P=0.002)。结论关节镜引导下复位内固定能够明显提升FTP患者的疗效,促进膝关节功能恢复,改善患者骨代谢指标,提高患者的生活质量,值得向临床推广应用。     

Preventable iatrogenic cause of foot-drop in knee injuries with literature review

PurposeCommon peroneal nerve palsy is quite disabling and every effort should be made to prevent its injury during the treatment.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the prospectively collected data of 7 cases of tibial plateau fractures in association with proximal fibula fracture from January 2019 to September 2019 who presented to emergency room of our hospital.ResultsIn addition to fibular neck fracture, the first case had type 6 tibial plateau displaced fracture and the second case had displaced acetabular fracture with instability of knee with tibial tuberosity avulsion. common peroneal nerve palsy developed following application of distal tibial skeletal traction in both the cases. Other 6 such cases remained neurologically intact as traction was not applied to them.ConclusionSuch iatrogenic complication could have been prevented if the injury pattern of "concomitant medial and lateral columns" of the proximal leg is kept in mind by the treating surgeon before applying skeletal traction.     

Fibula fixation in the treatment of tibial pilon fractures – Is it really necessary?

BackgroundThere is a lack of consensus about the role of fibula fixation in these complex fractures, with only two clinical studies in the literature. We hypothesize that the fibula fracture need not be fixed in the tibial pilon fractures if primary stability can be achieved with tibial fixation alone.MethodsWe reviewed 79 patients with operatively treated tibial pilon with associated fibula fractures from 2007 to 2017 and divided them into two groups; patients with fibula fracture fixation and those without fixation. The primary outcome measure was any mechanical complications. Secondary outcomes were wound complications and other morbidities.ResultsThere were 54 (68.4%) patients with fibula fixation and 25 (31.6%) patients without fixation. There were no statistically significant differences in mechanical complications between the two groups. However, patients without fibula fixation were noted to have more wound complications (44% vs 25.9%, p = 0.108) although this was not statistically significant. In terms of removal of implant (ROI), there were no differences noted in patients with or without fibula fixation (33.3% vs 28%, p = 0.796). There were also no significant differences in ROI for those fixed with plate and screws when compared to those fixed with Rush rod and K wire within the group with fibula fixation.ConclusionFibula fixation in the treatment of tibial pilon fractures is not routinely necessary and does not result in decreased mechanical complications such as malunion, delayed union, nonunion and implant failure. Fibula fracture fixation should be reserved for cases where it may aid reduction or provide additional stability.