髓内钉与微创经皮接骨板治疗胫骨远端骨折疗效的Meta分析北大核心CSCD

目的通过Meta分析比较髓内钉(IMN)与微创经皮接骨板(MIPPO)治疗胫骨远端骨折的疗效。方法计算机检索中国知网、万方数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库、Pubmed、Embase、Cochrane、Web of Science数据库2010年1月至2020年8月国内外正式刊物上公开发表的有关IMN与MIPPO治疗胫骨远端骨折的文献。纳入的研究由2名研究人员根据Cochrane偏倚风险标准进行评估。主要指标为手术时间、骨折愈合时间、浅表感染率、深部感染率、骨折畸形愈合率、骨折延迟愈合率或不愈合率、软组织刺激率,采用Review Manager 5.3软件进行数据分析。结果共纳入7项研究653例患者,其中IMN组325例,MIPPO组328例。Meta分析显示:IMN组手术时间短于MIPPO组(MD=-10.75,95%CI:-19.92~-1.58,P=0.02),IMN组的浅表感染率低于MIPPO组(RR=0.58,95%CI:0.39~0.88,P=0.01),IMN组的骨折畸形愈合率高于MIPPO组(RR=1.87,95%CI:1.15~3.04,P=0.01);软组织刺激率中,IMN组的膝前痛发生率高于MIPPO组(RR=16.98,95%CI:3.30~87.34,P=0.0007),而IMN组骨折处软组织刺激的发生率低于MIPPO组(RR=0.13,95%CI:0.04~0.40,P=0.0004),差异均有统计学意义。两组的骨折愈合时间、深部感染率、骨折延迟愈合率或不愈合率差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论IMN和MIPPO均是治疗胫骨远端骨折的优良方法,IMN在预防浅表组织感染表现得更为出色,但膝前痛发生概率较大,而MIPPO在防止骨折愈合畸形方面优于IMN,但骨折处软组织刺激可能性较大,建议胫前软组织条件良好时采用MIPPO,反之,则建议使用IMN来降低软组织感染率。     

Comparative study between intramedullary interlocking nailing and minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis for distal tibia extra-articular fractures

PurposeTreatment of distal tibia fractures poses significant challenge to orthopedic surgeon because of poor blood supply and paucity of soft tissue coverage. There is considerable controversy regarding the superior option of treatment for distal tibia fracture between the minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO) technique and intramedullary interlocking (IMIL) nailing for extra-articular distal tibia fractures. The aim of our study is to compare the functional outcome between the two treatment methods.MethodsThis was the prospective comparative study of 100 patients with distal third tibia fractures divided into two groups. The first group of patients were treated with MIPPO technique while the second group of patients were managed by IMIL nailing. Patients were followed up in outpatient department to assess the functional outcomes, malunion, delayed union, nonunion, superficial and deep infection between the two groups. Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS software (version 16.0).ResultsAverage malunion (degrees) in the MIPPO group was 5 (3–7) ± 1.41 vs. 10.22 (8–14) ± 2.04 in the IMIL group (p = 0.001). Similarly postoperative knee pain in the IMIL group was 10% vs. 2% in the MIPPO group (p = 0.001). In terms of superficial infection and nonunion, the results were 8% vs. 4% and 2% vs. 6% for the MIPPO and IMIL group, respectively (p = 0.001).ConclusionBoth procedures have shown the reliable method of fixation for distal extra-articular tibia fractures preserving the soft tissue, bony vascularity and fracture hematoma that provide a favourable biological environment for fracture healing. Considering the results of the study, we have slightly more preference for the MIPPO technique.     

Intramedullary nailing versus percutaneous locked plating of distal extra-articular tibial fractures: a retrospective study

The aim of this study is to compare distal tibial fractures (4–10 cm proximal to the plafond) treated by intramedullary nailing with those treated by percutaneous locked plating and to assess the clinical and radiographic results, complication rates, and the need for secondary procedures. Thirty-six patients received percutaneous locked plate treatment and 25 patients received intramedullary nail treatment. The results obtained from these two treatment methods were assessed by comparing infection rates, starting time for wight-bearing, local implant irritation, union and malunion rates and along with secondary procedures. In the percutaneous locked plate group, two deep infections, four superficial infections, two nonunions, one malunion and 10 local implant irritations were observed. In the intramedullary nail group, one nonunion, four malunions and two local implant irritations were observed. The incidence of deep and superficial infections, local implant irritations and secondary procedures in the percutaneous locked plate group was greater than those in the intramedullary nail group. The time to full weight bearing was shorter in the intramedullary nail group. There was no significant statistical difference in malunion and nonunion rates between the two groups. The need for secondary procedures was more common in group receiving the percutaneous locked plate treatment and the time to full weight bearing was shorter in the intramedullary nail group.     

Comparison between intramedullary nailing and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis for tibial shaft fractures

IntroductionIntramedullary nailing (IMN) is currently considered the gold standard in the surgical treatment of tibial shaft fractures in adult patients. In this case-control comparative study, we aimed to compare the efficacy of minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and IMN in treating tibial shaft fractures.Materials and methodsThe clinical and radiological outcomes, such as a modified trauma scale, operation time, fracture healing, rate of re-operation, and complications such as malunion, nonunion, shortening, and infection were assessed between IMN and MIPO for the treatment of tibial shaft fractures.ResultsSeventy-three skeletally mature patients who underwent IMN (group I) or MIPO (group M) for a closed extra-articular tibial shaft fracture (AO/OTA type 42) from June 2010 to May 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. The mean age was 51.16 (18~79) years, and the mean follow-up period was 22 (12~50) months. Bony union was achieved in all cases but one for each group - group I (35 cases) and group M (36 cases) (p > 0.05). Mean callus formation was observed in 12 (8 – 16) weeks in both groups (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in operative time, hospital stay, bone healing, and the rate of complications among the two groups (p > 0.05). There was also no postoperative difference in functional evaluation between the two methods (p > 0.05).ConclusionsNo discrepancy was found in radiological and clinical outcomes between IMN and MIPO for tibial shaft fractures. It can be concluded that both IMN and MIPO are equally effective treatment modalities for tibial shaft fractures.     

经皮微创锁定钢板治疗胫骨远端骨折

目的 探讨经皮微创锁定钢板治疗胫骨远端骨折的临床疗效.方法 对15例胫骨远端骨折患者采用经皮微创技术结合锁定钢板治疗.结果 15例均获随访,时间5～16(10±3.5)个月.骨折均愈合,愈合时间4.5～13.3(6.4±3.8)个月.按Johner-Wruhs评分标准:优9例,良4例,中2例.结论 经皮微创技术结合锁定钢板是治疗胫骨近端骨折的理想方法.     

微创经皮插入接骨板内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折

目的 介绍经皮插入接骨板内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折,并观察其效果。方法 采用闭合复位经皮插入接骨板内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折25例。AO分型：43A型15例(A2型6例,A3型9例),43B型6例,43C型4例。术后不辅以其他外固定,第2天即开始不负重关节功能锻炼。结果 随访25例,所有病例伤口一期愈合。骨折无延迟愈合,无畸形愈合,平均临床愈合时间15周。根据Mazur的踝关节功能评分．优良率95％。结论 微创经皮插入接骨板内固定术是治疗胫骨远端骨折的有效方法。     

微创经皮插入钢板治疗胫骨中下段骨折

2004年8月～2009年1月,我科采用经皮微创钢板内固定术治疗胫骨中下段骨折32例,疗效满意. 1 材料与方法 1.1 病例资料 本组32例,男18例,女14例,年龄22～58岁.骨折AO分型:A型20例,B型9例,C型3例;开放性骨折8例,按Gustilo分型:Ⅰ型5例,Ⅱ型3例;余24例为闭合性骨折.合并腓骨骨折10例.内固定材料选用胫骨中下段内侧解剖型锁定加压钢板.     

经皮微创接骨板技术治疗胫骨远端骨折的疗效分析

目的 探讨经皮微创接骨板(MIPO)技术治疗胫骨远端骨折的的手术方法及疗效.方法 2006年3月至2010年2月采用MIPO技术治疗22例胫骨远端骨折患者,男8例,女14例;年龄24～75岁,平均45.3岁.术后定期复查X线片,观察骨折愈合情况,应用Johne-Wruhs方法评估患肢功能和骨折愈合情况.结果 所有患者术后获6～33个月(平均14个月)随访.全部患者骨折均获愈合,愈合时间为15～24周,平均18.6周,1例出现软组织损伤.按照Johner-Wruhs评分评定疗效:优12例,良9例,可1例,优良率为95.5%.结论应用MIPO技术治疗胫骨远端骨折,可有效提高骨折愈合率,获得良好功能,并能减少并发症的发生.

Abstract：

Objective To report the efficacy of treatment of distal tibial fractures with minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO). Methods From March 2006 to January 2010, 22 cases of distal tibial fractures were treated with close reduction and the MIPO technique. They were 8 men and 14 women,with an average age of 45. 3 years (range, 24 to 75 years). The fracture healing was observed through regular follow-up radiography. Functional recovery of affected lower extremity was evaluated according to Johner-Wruhs scoring system. Results All the patients were followed up for an average of 14 months (range,6 to 33 months). All the fractures were healed after an average time of 18. 6 weeks (range, 15 to 24 weeks). Soft tissue problem occurred in only one case. According to Johner-Wruhs scoring, 12 cases were excellent, 9 good and one fair. The total excellent to good rate was 95. 5%. Conclusion In treatment of distal tibial fractures, MIPO technique can improve fracture healing and functional recovery through decreasing postoperative complications.     

经皮锁定板微创治疗胫骨远段骨折

目的探讨应用锁定板经皮内固定治疗胫骨远段骨折的疗效。方法采用小切口经皮插入胫骨远段内侧锁定板治疗29例胫骨远段骨折。结果 25例获得随访,时间12-28个月。骨折临床愈合时间12-20周。1例开放性骨折者发生皮肤坏死,换药后愈合。5例切口线结反应,取出线结后愈合。5例骨折延迟愈合（3例为27周,2例33周）,无内固定断裂与松动。按Johnor-Wruhs胫骨骨折临床效果评分法：优15例,良7例,中2例,差1例。结论锁定板经皮微创治疗胫骨远段骨折,创伤小、恢复快、骨折愈合率高,疗效较好。     

微创经皮钢板内固定治疗Schatzker Ⅵ型胫骨平台骨折的前瞻性研究

目的 对比研究微创经皮钢板内固定(MIPPO)和传统钢板内固定治疗Schatzker Ⅵ型胫骨平台骨折的临床疗效. 方法采用前瞻性研究将2000年3月～2004年12月期间诊治的34例Schatzker Ⅵ型胫骨平台骨折患者随机分为MIPPO治疗组(17例)和传统钢板内固定治疗组(17例).比较两组病例疗效的差异. 结果 MIPPO治疗组的手术耗时、手术失血量和并发症较传统钢板内固定治疗组显著减少(P＜0.05),骨折愈合更快(P＜0.05)和膝关节功能恢复更满意(P＜0.05),患者对疗效更满意(P＜0.05).结论 小切口直视治疗关节内损伤结合经皮治疗其他骨折部位的MIPPO可解剖复位关节内骨折,尽可能地保留了软组织的完整性,降低了软组织的手术损伤,减少了感染等并发症的发生,有利于软组织、骨折愈合和膝关节功能的恢复,是治疗Schatzker Ⅵ型胫骨平台骨折的一种理想方法.     

锁定钢板结合微创技术治疗胫骨远端骨折

目的探讨锁定钢板结合微创技术治疗胫骨远端骨折的临床疗效。方法应用锁定钢板微创治疗11例胫骨远端骨折患者。结果手术时间70～120min;术中出血量50～250ml,均未输血;切口均一期愈合。11例均获随访,时间6～18个月。骨折愈合时间4～8个月。按Mazur踝关节功能评分标准：优9例,良1例,中1例。结论锁定钢板结合微创技术治疗胫骨远端骨折,创伤小、恢复快、骨折愈合率高,临床疗效满意。     

Locking internal fixator with minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis for the proximal and distal tibial fractures

Objective: To investigate the efficacy of the locking internal fixator (LIF), which includes the locking compression plate (LCP) and the less invasive stable system (LISS), in the proximal and distal tibial fractures. Methods: We did a retrospective study on a total of 98 patients with either proximal or distal tibial fractures from January 2003 to January 2007, who had received the operation with LIF by the minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) technique. The data consisted of 43 proximal tibial fractures (type AO41C3) and 55 distal tibial fractures (type AO43C3). Results: No complications were observed in all patients after operation. The mean healing time was 8.4 months (range 5-14 months). Only two cases of delayed union occurred at postoperative 10 months. No infections were reported after the definitive surgery even in the cases of open fractures. All patients reached a full range of motion at postoperative 6 to 9 months and regained the normal functions of knee and ankle joints. Conclusion: Using LIF in MIPO technique is a reliable approach towards the proximal and distal tibial fractures that are not suitable for intramedullary nailing.     

外支架辅助间接复位MIPO治疗胫骨远侧干骺端骨折

[目的]探讨平衡牵引外支架辅助间接复位在胫骨远侧干骺端骨折前外侧入路微创接骨板接骨术(MIPO)中的应用效果。[方法]回顾性分析2012年8月～2017年8月治疗的32例胫骨远侧干骺端骨折临床资料,术中先用单针双边外支架平衡牵引、复位与临时固定,而后MIPO手术。记录手术时间,包括复位时间和透视时间。术后根据正侧位X线片分别测量胫骨内-外翻、前-后屈成角的角度,评估复位质量。记录手术并发症和骨折愈合时间。末次随访应用Johner-Wruhs评分评价功能。[结果]32例中简单骨折13例,粉碎性骨折19例,两者之间的复位时间、透视时间和手术时间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两者术后内-外翻与前-后屈成角均不超过5°,两者之间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。所有患者均获得术后随访12～21个月。两者之间骨折愈合时间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后1例浅表感染,2例敏感性瘢痕,均发生在远侧微创切口。1例骨折不愈合,二期植骨后愈合,无畸形愈合及内固定失效,骨折愈合率96.88%。末次随访Johner-Wruhs评分优良率93.75%。[结论]平衡牵引外支架辅助MIPO手术,间接复位效果可靠,可重复性强,尤其适用于胫骨远侧干骶端粉碎性骨折前外侧入路微创手术。     

微创经皮钢板内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折

胫腓骨远端骨折在胫腓骨骨折中最为常见，由于其创伤解剖的特殊性，治疗方法的选择有一定的难度，特别是远端粉碎性骨折，术后易发生骨不连、切口皮肤坏死、感染及关节功能障碍等并发症。自2001年3月-2004年7月我院应用微创经皮钢板内固定（MIPPO）治疗胫骨远端骨折32例，疗效满意，报告如下。     

胫骨多向锁定髓内针与胫骨远端钢板治疗胫骨远端骨折的疗效比较

[目的]比较分析胫骨多向锁定带锁髓内针(TTMLIIN)与经皮微创胫骨远端钢板固定(MIPPO)治疗胫骨远端骨折的临床疗效。[方法]回顾性分析本院2010年11月~2014年12月收治的胫骨远端骨折患者45例,根据AO骨折分型标准:43A型21例,43B型12例,43C型8例。23例采取胫骨多向锁定带锁髓内针固定,其中3例为Ⅱ度以上开放性骨折;18例采用经皮微创胫骨远端钢板固定,其中9例为Ⅱ度以上开放性骨折。术后进行临床随访,采用门诊定期预约随访的方法,对患者的功能恢复和并发症发生情况等进行随访和记录。观察两组手术相关情况,包括手术时间和术中出血量以及骨折愈合时间与完全负重时间。应用Johner-Wruhs胫骨骨折评分系统评价患肢功能,并进行膝关节HSS评分和踝关节AOFAS评分。观察两组的并发症发生情况。[结果]MIPO组的手术时间显著长于TMLIIN组,术中出血量显著大于TMLIIN组(P0.05)。但两组骨折愈合时间与完全负重时间比较差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。经Johner-Wruhs评分系统评价患肢功能,MIPO组:优9例,良6例,可1例,差2例。TMLIIN组:优17例,良6例,可0例,差0例,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。术后12个月,两组膝关节HSS评分和踝关节AOFAS评分比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。术后MIPO组有2例皮肤坏死,1例伤口感染,1例骨折不愈合,1例骨折延迟愈合;TMLIIN组有1例水泡结痂后皮肤破溃坏死骨外露,两组患者并发症发生率比较差异有统计学意义,MIPO组显著高于TMLIIN组,P0.05。[结论]胫骨远端骨折实施胫骨多向锁定带锁髓内针与胫骨远端钢板治疗均能够获得理想的固定和骨折愈合效果,经皮微创胫骨远端钢板固定的并发症相对较少。     

Intramedullary nailing of distal metaphyseal tibial fractures

BACKGROUND: The treatment of distal metaphyseal tibial fractures remains controversial. This study was performed to evaluate the results of intramedullary nailing of distal tibial fractures located within 5 cm of the ankle joint. METHODS: Over a sixteen-month period at two institutions, thirty-six tibial fractures that involved the distal 5 cm of the tibia were treated with reamed intramedullary nailing with use of either two or three distal interlocking screws. Ten fractures with articular extension were treated with supplementary screw fixation prior to the intramedullary nailing. Radiographs were reviewed to determine the immediate and final alignments and fracture-healing. The Short Form-36 (SF-36) and Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (MFA) questionnaires were used to evaluate functional outcome. RESULTS: Acceptable radiographic alignment, defined as <5 degrees of angulation in any plane, was obtained in thirty-three patients (92%). No patient had any change in alignment between the immediate postoperative and the final radiographic evaluation. Complications included one deep infection and one iatrogenic fracture at the time of the intramedullary nailing. Six patients could not be followed. The remaining thirty fractures united at an average of 23.5 weeks. Three patients with associated traumatic bone loss underwent a staged autograft procedure, and they had fracture-healing at an average of 44.3 weeks. The functional outcome was determined at a minimum of one year for nineteen patients and at a minimum of two years (average, 4.5 years) for fifteen patients. At one year, there were significant limitations in several domains despite fracture union and maintenance of alignment, but there was improvement in the MFA scores with time. CONCLUSIONS: Intramedullary nailing is an effective alternative for the treatment of distal metaphyseal tibial fractures. Simple articular extension of the fracture is not a contraindication to intramedullary fixation. Functional outcomes improve with time.     

Intramedullary nailing versus proximal plating in the management of closed extra-articular proximal tibial fracture: a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundExtra-articular proximal tibial fractures account for 5–11 % of all tibial shaft fractures. In recent years, closed reduction and minimally invasive plating and multidirectional locked intramedullary nailing have both become widely used treatment modalities for proximal and distal tibial metaphyseal fractures. This study was performed to compare plating and nailing options in proximal tibia extra-articular fractures.ResultsPostoperative hospital stay (p = 0.035), time to full weight-bearing, and union time (p = 0.004) were significantly less in the IMN group than in the PTP group, but there was no clear advantage of either technique in terms of operative time (p = 0.082), infection rate (p = 0.738), range of motion of the knee (p = 0.462), or degrees of malunion and nonunion.ConclusionBoth implants have shown promising results in extra-articular proximal tibial fractures, and provide rigid fixation that prevents secondary fracture collapse.

Level of evidence

Level 2, randomized controlled trial.