桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

内外联合固定治疗不稳定性骨盆骨折

目的探讨切开复位内固定结合骨盆外固定架在不稳定性骨盆骨折治疗中的应用及效果。方法对2003年12月~2013年12月获得随访的29例不稳定性骨盆骨折患者进行回顾性分析,男性18例,女性11例;年龄18~57岁,平均32.5岁。按Tile分型的不稳定性骨盆骨折,均采用切开复位内固定结合外固定架技术治疗不稳定性骨盆骨折。结果随访6~18个月,29例均获得骨性愈合,恢复原来工作。术后功能评定按Majeed评分标准:优18例,良8例,可3例。结论切开复位内固定结合外固定架固定技术是治疗不稳定性骨盆骨折的有效方法。     

严重开放性骨盆骨折损害控制手术策略探讨

目的探讨严重开放性骨盆骨折合并毗邻脏器损伤的术中损害控制外科（DCS）程序。方法回顾性分析2002年1月～2011年12月收治的21例严重开放性骨盆骨折的临床资料。初期行髂内动脉结扎19例,选择性髂内动脉造影栓塞2例;伤道和腹膜后填塞止血11例;膀胱造瘘7例,膀胱修补加尿道会师2例;腹膜内结直肠伤I期修补4例,造瘘1例;腹膜外直肠伤结肠造口13例,远近端钳夹留待Ⅱ期手术3例;骨盆外固定支架固定14例;其他合并伤予相应处理。确定性骨盆整复内固定及结直肠和后尿道重建术留待后期。结果死亡6例（29％）,死因为大出血致严重休克5例,腹腔盆底严重感染致多器官功能衰竭（MODS）1例。并发症7例次：直肠膀胱瘘3例,腹腔间隙综合征（ACS）2例,髂血管血栓形成截肢1例,截瘫1例;除截瘫外,其余均非手术治疗临床治愈。结论髂内动脉结扎加填塞是治疗严重开放骨盆骨折出血的重要手段;合并膀胱结直肠损伤时应完成初期改道术;应常规安置骨盆外固定支架。     

骨盆骨折合并严重会阴部损伤36例

目的 探讨骨盆骨折合并严重会阴部损伤的诊治。方法 本组３６例,男２８例,女８例;年龄１１￣５５岁,平均３２．８岁。救治方法除积极抢救失血性休克处,主要是会阴部损伤的止血;采取彻底清创、骶前引流、转流性结肠造瘘术,以防止会阴部伤口的感染。结果 ３６例中死亡５例,死亡原因为会阴部伤口的出血和感染。其余３１例会阴部伤口均愈合。结论 治疗成功的关键是处理及时、正确;会阴部伤口彻底清创,放置引流管冲洗,果断     

经皮钉-棒内支架治疗不稳定骨盆前环骨折

目的探讨经皮钉-棒内支架治疗不稳定骨盆前环骨折临床应用。方法回顾性分析经皮钉-棒内支架治疗的12例不稳定骨盆前环骨折患者的临床资料,男性8例,女性4例;年龄23~63岁,平均43.8岁。骨盆骨折按照Tile分类:B3 4例,C1 4例,C2 3例,C3 1例。后环损伤采用经皮骶髂螺钉固定2例,髂腰固定1例,钢板固定6例,其中M张力带钢板固定4例。结果前环固定平均出血70m L(50~90m L),平均手术时间65min(50~85min)。单侧股外侧皮神经损伤5例,均恢复正常;随访4~15个月,无切口感染、内固定失效等,骨折均获骨性愈合,疗效满意。结论经皮钉-棒内支架是治疗不稳定骨盆前环骨折微创舒适、简便、安全的方法,疗效好,但术中应警惕股外侧皮神经损伤。     

External fixation combined with limited internal fixation in the treatment of pilon tibia fractures

BACKGROUND/AIM: Intraarticular fractures of the tibial plafond (pilon fractures) belong to the group of most severe fractures. They are usually caused by high-energy trauma and frequently associated with a marked soft-tissue damage. Surgical treatment has replaced the traditional nonoperative treatment. The aim of this study was to present the results of the treatment of distal tibial intraarticular fracture by the use of internal fixation, as well as the combination of minimal internal fixation and external fixation. METHODS: The study included 47 patients with pilon tibia fractures who went through at the Clinic for Orthopedics and Traumatology, School of Medicine, Nis (1995-2004). Within the analayzed group there were 33 (70.2%) males and 14 (29.8%) females. The patients mean age was 45.8 years. In the first group, which consisted of 22 patients, open reduction and internal fixation of both the tibia and the fibula was performed in the two separate incisions. The second group consisted of 25 patients managed with external fixation by external fixator "Mitkovi?" with limited internal fixation. Besides external fixation, a minimal internal fixation was performed by the use of Kirschner wires and screws. The patients were followed-up inside a 24-months-period. Results. The obtained was a substantially high number of complications after open reduction and internal fixation in the group of patients. There was no difference in a long-term clinical outcome. Postoperative osteitis, as the most severe complication in the management of closed pilon tibia fractures, was not registered in the second group. CONCLUSION: Considering the results obtained in this study, it can be concluded that external fixation by the "Mitkovi?" external fixator with the minimal internal fixation is a satisfactory method for the tratment of fractures of the tibial plafond causing less complications than internal fixation.     

钢板内固定与经皮克氏针固定治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效比较

目的 比较切开复位钢板内固定和经皮克氏针固定治疗桡骨远端骨折的临床疗效.方法选取2002年1月-2007年6月收治的110例行切开复位内固定的桡骨远端骨折患者,选取同期107例行经皮克氏针固定的患者,随访比较两组临床疗效. 结果 所有患者随访5-12个月,按Gartland和Werley评分标准,钢板内固定组的优良率为86.4%,经皮克氏针固定组优良率为74.8%(P<0.05).而C3型骨折单独比较,两组优良率分别为76.9%和70.0%(P>0.05). 结论 切开复位内固定治疗桡骨远端骨折总体临床疗效优于经皮克氏针组,但治疗C3型骨折疗效欠佳.     

有限内固定结合单侧多功能外固定架治疗胫腓骨严重开放粉碎性骨折

目的观察有限内固定结合单侧多功能外固定支架治疗胫腓骨严重开放粉碎性骨折的疗效。方法使用有限内固定(钢丝、螺丝钉、克氏针)结合单侧多功能外固定架固定胫骨,同时钢板、克氏针、钢丝固定腓骨治疗胫腓骨严重开放粉碎性骨折。结果本组42例随访6~24个月,平均12个月。伤口愈合情况:25例I期甲级愈合;15例皮肤发黑、坏死,经换药,皮瓣转移愈合;2例感染,经换药引流、分泌物培养、选用敏感抗生素、皮瓣转移及植皮后愈合,无一例骨髓炎。骨折愈合情况:40例于骨折术后13~32周愈合,平均18周;2例骨缺损致骨不连在伤口愈合后3个月行植骨+钢板内固定,术后3个月骨折愈合。另螺钉松动1例,松动伴钉道感染1例,经用酒精点滴钉孔痊愈,无血管、神经损伤。除1例踝关节僵直外,其余41例膝、踝关节功能正常。结论该手术操作简单,创伤小,复位好,固定可靠,是治疗胫腓骨严重开放粉碎性骨折的良好方法。     

有限内固定治疗开放性跟骨骨折

目的：探讨应用有限内固定（克氏针、空心钉）治疗GustiloⅠ～Ⅲ型开放性跟骨骨折的方法及其疗效。方法对17例（男性15例,女性2例;年龄23～64岁,平均43.5岁） GustiloⅠ～Ⅲ型开放性跟骨骨折患者应用有限内固定治疗,观察伤口愈合及治疗前后B?hler角、Gissane角恢复情况。结果17例创面均愈合,有4例发生创面软组织缺损,经过皮瓣修复覆盖伤口愈合。全部患者随访6～12个月,平均10个月,复位无丢失,骨折均愈合。按Maryland足功能评价优11例,良4例,可1例,差1例,优良率达88.2％。术后患者的B?hler角、Gissane角较治疗前显著改善,P＜0.05。结论有限内固定治疗Gustilo Ⅰ～Ⅲ型开放性跟骨骨折方法简便,既能有效地复位固定,而且对开放性创面的处理有明显优势,大大降低皮肤感染或坏死的概率,减少创伤,是治疗开放性跟骨骨折的有效方法。     

多功能外固定支架结合腓骨内固定治疗胫骨极远端近关节面部位骨折

目的：分析和观察多功能外固定支架结合腓骨内固定治疗胫骨极远端近关节面部位骨折的疗效。方法：采用多功能外固定支架结合腓骨切开复位内固定进行外固定治疗。结果：17例病人经过平均13个月随访全部骨性愈合,平均愈合时间4个月,去除外固定支架时间平均5个月。1例病人针道深部慢性感染,窦道刮除后置管闭合冲洗痊愈。2例病人术后3处针道浅部感染,换药、抗炎愈合。所有病人踝关节、趾间关节功能良好,无畸形。结论：多功能外固定支架结合腓骨内固定治疗胫骨极远端近关节面部位骨折操作简单,效果佳,愈合快。     

Experience in a military trauma surgery department with external skeletal fixation of femur fractures

Our experience with external skeletal fixation of complex open and closed femoral fractures in 50 conventional trauma victims is presented. Different external fixator systems were primarily used in 26 patients and secondarily in 24 patients. The authors feel that early definitive femoral fracture care in civilian and military trauma victims employing unilateral external monofixation, which avoids casts, and allows improved wound management and early mobilization of the multitrauma patient, has decreased the complication rate commonly associated with internal fixation of open femoral fractures.