掌侧MIPPO入路与Henry入路治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效对比研究

目的比较掌侧MIPPO入路与Henry入路在治疗桡骨远端骨折中的疗效。方法回顾性分析2016年5月—2017年5月青岛大学附属医院创伤外科行桡骨远端骨折手术患者30例,男性8例,女性22例;年龄40~75岁,平均61.8岁。其中采用掌侧MIPPO入路患者为MIPPO组(16例),采用Henry入路患者为Henry组(14例)。比较两组患者一般资料、手术时间、术中出血量、骨折愈合时间、并发症、腕关节活动范围以及上肢功能评定标准(DASH)评分。结果MIPPO组手术时间(40.4±1.5)min短于Henry组(60.8±1.9)min(P<0.05),术中出血量MIPPO组(20.3±14.5)mL少于Henry组(65.5±12.2)mL,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组患者的一般资料、骨折愈合时间、并发症、腕关节活动范围及DASH评分相比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论MIPPO入路相比较Henry入路治疗桡骨远端骨折具有创伤小、手术时间短、出血量少等优点。

Effect comparison of valor MIPPO approach and Henry approach in treatment of distal radial frature

Objective To compare clinical effects of MIPPO approach and Henry approach in treatment of distal radial fractures.Methds A retrospective analysis was performed on 30 patients,including 8 males and 22 females,aged 40-75 years,with an average age of 61.8 years.All patients underwent surgery for distal radius fractures in Department of Traumatic Surgery,Affiliated Hospital to Qindao University from May 2016 to May 2017.A total of 16 patients were treated via volar MIPPO approach and 14 treated via Henry approach.The general information,average operation time,intraoperative bleeding volume,fracture healing time,postoperative complications,active range of motion of wrist joint,shoulder and hand(DASH)score in two groups were detected,recorded and compared.Results The average operation time in MIPPO group was(40.4±1.5)minutes,which was shorter than that in Henry group of(60.8±1.9)minutes(P<0.5).The average intraoperative bleeding volume in MIPPO group(20.3±14.5)mL was less than that in Henry group(65.5±12.2)mL,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in general information,fracture healing time,postoperative complications,active range of motion of wrist joint,shoulder and hand(DASH)score between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion Compared with Henry approach,MIPPO has the advantages of less trauma,shorter operation time and less bleeding in the treatment of distal radius fractures.