Operative treatment results of posterior malleolar fractures in trimalleolar fractures with screw fixation and plate fixation: short-term results.

IF 1.4 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE International Journal of Burns and Trauma Pub Date : 2024-02-15 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01
Mehdi Teimouri, Hossein Akbari Aghdam, Reza Alipoor, Sahar Sadat Lalehzar
{"title":"Operative treatment results of posterior malleolar fractures in trimalleolar fractures with screw fixation and plate fixation: short-term results.","authors":"Mehdi Teimouri, Hossein Akbari Aghdam, Reza Alipoor, Sahar Sadat Lalehzar","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ankle fractures are among the most common lower limb fractures. There is no agreement about the best treatment for these fractures. This study compared the short-term results of screw and plate fixation methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective study, 32 patients that underwent screw fixation for posterior malleolar fracture and 32 patients that underwent plate fixation for posterior malleolar fracture were assessed 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age in group 1 (screw fixation) and group 2 (plate fixation) was 32.56, and 37.82 ± 9.99, respectively. The frequency of gender in group 1 (screw fixation) and group 2 (plate fixation) for females and males was 20%, 80%, 4%, and 18%, respectively. The mean range of motion (ROM) in month 1 in group 1 was 89.4, in group 2 was 90.22, in month 3 in group 1 was 100.6, in group 2 was 100.36, in month 6 in group 1 was 115.4, and in group 2 was 110.68. The mean visual analog scale (VAS) in month 1 in group 1 was 6.88, in group 2 was 6.09, in month 3 in group 1 was 4.14, in group 2 was 3.63, in month 6 in group 1 was 2.56, and in group 2 was 2.54. In group 1, we had 1 case of nerve injury, 1 case of deep infection, and 3 cases of superficial infection, and in group 2, we had 2 cases of nerve injury, 2 cases of deep infection, and no case of superficial infection. The mean foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS) in group 1 was 75.44, and in group 2 was 74.36.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In our study, we were unable to indicate a superior treatment method. More comprehensive studies with larger populations are suggested.</p>","PeriodicalId":45488,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Burns and Trauma","volume":"14 1","pages":"14-24"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10944710/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Burns and Trauma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Ankle fractures are among the most common lower limb fractures. There is no agreement about the best treatment for these fractures. This study compared the short-term results of screw and plate fixation methods.

Methods: In this prospective study, 32 patients that underwent screw fixation for posterior malleolar fracture and 32 patients that underwent plate fixation for posterior malleolar fracture were assessed 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery.

Results: The mean age in group 1 (screw fixation) and group 2 (plate fixation) was 32.56, and 37.82 ± 9.99, respectively. The frequency of gender in group 1 (screw fixation) and group 2 (plate fixation) for females and males was 20%, 80%, 4%, and 18%, respectively. The mean range of motion (ROM) in month 1 in group 1 was 89.4, in group 2 was 90.22, in month 3 in group 1 was 100.6, in group 2 was 100.36, in month 6 in group 1 was 115.4, and in group 2 was 110.68. The mean visual analog scale (VAS) in month 1 in group 1 was 6.88, in group 2 was 6.09, in month 3 in group 1 was 4.14, in group 2 was 3.63, in month 6 in group 1 was 2.56, and in group 2 was 2.54. In group 1, we had 1 case of nerve injury, 1 case of deep infection, and 3 cases of superficial infection, and in group 2, we had 2 cases of nerve injury, 2 cases of deep infection, and no case of superficial infection. The mean foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS) in group 1 was 75.44, and in group 2 was 74.36.

Conclusion: In our study, we were unable to indicate a superior treatment method. More comprehensive studies with larger populations are suggested.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用螺钉固定和钢板固定三趾骨骨折的后踝骨骨折的手术治疗效果:短期结果。
背景:踝关节骨折是最常见的下肢骨折之一:踝关节骨折是最常见的下肢骨折之一。关于这些骨折的最佳治疗方法,目前尚无一致意见。本研究比较了螺钉和钢板固定方法的短期效果:在这项前瞻性研究中,对 32 名接受螺钉固定治疗后踝骨骨折的患者和 32 名接受钢板固定治疗后踝骨骨折的患者进行了术后 1、3 和 6 个月的评估:第 1 组(螺钉固定)和第 2 组(钢板固定)的平均年龄分别为 32.56 岁和 37.82±9.99 岁。第一组(螺钉固定)和第二组(钢板固定)中女性和男性的性别比例分别为 20%、80%、4% 和 18%。第1组第1个月的平均活动范围(ROM)为89.4,第2组为90.22,第3个月第1组为100.6,第2组为100.36,第6个月第1组为115.4,第2组为110.68。第 1 组第 1 个月的平均视觉模拟量表(VAS)为 6.88,第 2 组为 6.09,第 1 组第 3 个月为 4.14,第 2 组为 3.63,第 1 组第 6 个月为 2.56,第 2 组为 2.54。第 1 组有 1 例神经损伤、1 例深部感染和 3 例表皮感染,第 2 组有 2 例神经损伤、2 例深部感染和无表皮感染。第一组的足踝结果评分(FAOS)平均值为 75.44,第二组为 74.36:在我们的研究中,我们无法指出一种更好的治疗方法。建议对更多人群进行更全面的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
12.50%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Concurrent avulsion of posterior cruciate ligament and semimembranosus: a case-based discussion and literature review. Autologous non-vascularized fibula with compression plating in the management of aseptic complex non-union of long bones. Combined awake videolaryngo-bronchoscopy intubation with HFNC preoxygenation for predicted difficult airway in a patient with post-burn mentosternal scar contracture. Comparative outcome of ultrasound guided vs. fluoroscopy guided hydrodilatation in adhesive capsulitis: a prospective study. Evaluation of pain associated with the application of burn dressings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1