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     

Biodegradable versus titanium osteosynthesis in maxillofacial traumatology: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Titanium osteosynthesis is currently the fixation system of choice in maxillofacial traumatology. Biodegradable osteosynthesis systems have the ability to degrade in the human body. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review, with meta- and trial sequential analyses, to assess the efficacy and morbidity of biodegradable versus titanium osteosynthesis after maxillofacial trauma. MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for randomized controlled trials and prospective and retrospective controlled studies. Five time periods were studied: perioperative, short-term (0–4 weeks), intermediate (6–12 weeks), long-term (>12 weeks), and overall follow-up. After screening 3542 records, 24 were included. All had a high risk of performance and detection bias due to the nature of the interventions. Meta-analysis showed no differences in efficacy or morbidity between biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis. The risk of perioperative screw breakage was significantly higher (risk ratio 17.13, 95% confidence interval 2.19–34.18) and the symptomatic plate removal rate lower in the biodegradable group (risk ratio 0.11, 95% confidence interval 0.02–0.57), which was confirmed by the trial sequential analysis. The quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Based on the narrative review and meta-analyses, current evidence shows that biodegradable osteosynthesis is a viable alternative to titanium osteosynthesis when applied in the treatment of maxillofacial trauma, with similar efficacy but significantly lower symptomatic plate removal rates. Perioperative screw breakage occurred significantly more often in the biodegradable group compared to the titanium group.     

Dietary and herbal supplements use among patients hospitalized in internal medicine departments

ObjectivesTo assess consumption of dietary and herbal supplements (DHS) among patients in internal medicine departments and determine whether such use is documented in their medical files.Methods267 patients from three internal medicine departments of an academic medical center in Haifa, Israel were assessed prospectively with questionnaires about their DHS use in the month preceding hospitalization. DHS were categorized into vitamins & minerals, herbal supplements and others. Further data was then collected from patients' medical records on socio-demographic and medical characteristics, as well as documentation of DHS use.Results123 patients (50.6 %) used DHS on a daily basis. Most of them (53.7 %) were using more than one DHS. DHS use was more prevalent in older (OR = 1.02 [1.001–1.036], p = 0.034) and educated (OR = 0.482 [0.252-0.923], p = 0.028) patients. Vitamins & minerals were used mainly to enhance vitality and address laboratory abnormalities, whereas herbal supplements were used mainly for gastrointestinal problems (p < 0.001). DHS use was reported to the physicians by 42 % of the patients, mostly at the patients’ initiative [92 (82.1 %), p < 0.001)]. Vitamins and minerals were the most reported category of DHS (94 (57.3 %), p < 0.001). The use of DHS was reported to physicians for 112 DHS (41.8 %) but only 32 DHS (11.9 %) were documented in their medical files. The documentation of vitamins and minerals was significantly higher compared to herbal supplements documentation (29 (17.7 %) & 3 (2.9 %) respectively, P < 0.001).ConclusionsDHS are commonly used by patients hospitalized in the internal medicine departments. Many patients do not report such use to the physicians, and more strikingly, physicians do not document DHS use in patient medical files. This communication gap may have serious medico-legal ramifications due to DHS side effects and DHS interactions with other DHS and with conventional drugs.     

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。     

F形空心钉与传统3枚平行钉治疗Pauwels Ⅲ型股骨颈骨折的疗效比较

目的:分析比较"F"形空心钉与传统倒三角3枚平行螺钉内固定治疗青壮年Pauwels Ⅲ型股骨颈骨折的临床疗效。方法：2017年1月至2020年1月收治Pauwels Ⅲ型股骨颈骨折患者38例，根据置入钉方式的不同将其分为两组，其中A组18例，采用"F"形空心钉固定，男12例，女6例，年龄37~55岁，受伤至手术时间1~3 d。B组20例，采用传统倒三角3枚平行拉力螺钉固定，男12例，女8例，年龄35~55岁，受伤至手术时间为1~3 d。比较两组患者骨折不愈合，股骨头坏死，股骨颈短缩，空心螺钉退出情况，髋关节功能Harris评分，疼痛视觉模拟评分（visual analogue scale，VAS）。结果：所有患者获得随访，时间为15~31个月。两组患者在骨折不愈合，股骨颈短缩，股骨头坏死方面差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）；两组患者在螺钉退出方面差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。两组患者术后12个月时髋关节Harris评分及VAS评分差异均无统计学差异（P>0.05）。结论："F"形与传统倒三角3枚平行空心钉内固定治疗青壮年Pauwels Ⅲ型股骨颈骨折中短期疗效相似，但"F"形空心钉退钉率较低。     

A comparison of double single suture-button fixation,suture-button fixation,and screw fixation for ankle syndesmosis injury: A retrospective cohort study

Different methods have been used throughout the years for syndesmotic injury but there is no consensus on the ideal treatment. Some methods are expensive and some have more complications. The aim of this study is to compare single suture endobutton with double suture endobutton and screw fixation for syndesmotic injury.Sixty nine patients with syndesmotic injury with fibular fractures whom were treated with a single interosseous suture endobutton system (ZipTight^TM, Zimmer Biomet), a double interosseous suture endobutton system (ZipTight^TM, Zimmer Biomet) and 1 syndesmotic screw (TST, Istanbul, Turkey) were included in this study. Functional and radiological results from patient records between 2015 and 2018 were retrospectively evaluated.Twenty patients were treated with the double interosseous suture endobutton, 23 were treated with the single interosseous suture endobutton, and 26 were treated with traditional AO screw fixation. Three patients from the screw fixation group (11.5%) required revision surgery (P < .05). All the radiologic and clinical outcomes were statistical similar in all 3 groups.Our findings showed that the interosseous suture endobutton system is at least as safe as the screw fixation technique for treatment of syndesmosis joint injuries and can be used as an alternative to the screw method. The interosseous suture endobutton system eliminates the need for a second surgery to remove the hardware, which minimizes the probability of re-diastasis. Since our results showed no statistical difference between single and double interosseous suture endobutton systems, the less costly single endobutton system may be the better alternative.     

手法整复可调式外固定支具治疗第5掌骨颈骨折临床研究

目的:探讨可调式外固定支具治疗第5掌骨颈骨折的可行性及有效性。方法:选取2014年1月～2017年6月我院收治的54例第5掌骨颈骨折患者作为研究对象,随机分为A组和B组,每组27例。A组行闭合复位交叉克氏针固定,B组行手法整复可调式外固定支具固定,比较两组末次随访第5掌指关节活动度和主观满意度。结果:随访4～10个月,两组患者第5掌指关节活动度(ROM)值相比较,差异无统计学意义,P0.05;两组的主观满意度相比较,差异无统计学意义,P0.05。结论:手法整复可调式外固定支具固定可为第5掌骨颈骨折提供可靠、有效的固定,有助于患者的早期功能恢复,是一种有效的治疗方法。     

椎弓根螺钉三椎体内固定对脊椎爆裂性骨折患者椎体与神经功能状态的影响观察

目的:探讨椎弓根螺钉三椎体内固定对脊椎爆裂性骨折患者椎体与神经功能状态的影响.方法:选取2013年7月至2015年1月于本院进行治疗的58例脊椎爆裂性骨折患者为研究对象,对其进行回顾性研究,将其根据手术方式不同分为对照组(短节段椎弓根内固定组)29例和观察组(椎弓根螺钉三椎体内固定组)29例,然后将两组患者手术前与手术后不同时间的伤椎恢复指标与血清神经功能相关指标进行比较.结果:观察组手术后不同时间的伤椎恢复指标中的后凸Cobb角、椎体平移率、椎体高度丢失率与血清神经功能相关指标中的BDNF、NSE、NGF及S100B均显著好于同期的对照组指标,并且明显好于其治疗前,均有显著性差异(P＜0.05).结论:椎弓根螺钉三椎体内固定可更为有效地恢复脊椎爆裂性骨折患者椎体参数,并且更有助于神经功能状态的恢复.