[Comparison of the posterior hemipelvectomy of the greater trochanter approach with the standard Kocher-Langenbeck approach in the treatment of posterior acetabulum wall fractures].

Jin Zhang, Jian-Jun Shen, Xiang Hai, Chuan-Yuan Liu, Wen-Jie Zhou, Zhi-Wei Chen
{"title":"[Comparison of the posterior hemipelvectomy of the greater trochanter approach with the standard Kocher-Langenbeck approach in the treatment of posterior acetabulum wall fractures].","authors":"Jin Zhang, Jian-Jun Shen, Xiang Hai, Chuan-Yuan Liu, Wen-Jie Zhou, Zhi-Wei Chen","doi":"10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20221109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the clinical efficacy of the posterior hemipelvectomy of the greater trochanter approach with the standard Kocher-Langenbeck(K-L) approach in the treatment of posterior acetabulum wall fractures and to explore a more optimal approach for the treatment of posterior acetabulum wall fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Total of 26 patients with posterior acetabulum wall fractures were retrospectively analysed and divided into two groups:the posterior hemipelvectomy of the greater trochanter group (test group) and the standard K-L approach group (control group). In the test group, there were 24 patients including 16 males and 8 females with an average age of (42.00±4.52) years old, the time of injury to surgery was (6.75±1.15) d. In the control group, there were 23 patients including 16 males and 7 females with an average age of (41.00±5.82) years old, the time of injury to surgery was (7.09±1.20) days. The total hospital stay, length of incision, operation time, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative drainage, discharge, fracture reduction quality (Matta criteria), hip abduction muscle strength, hip function (Merle d'Aubigne-Postel score), postoperative complications and the incidence of ectopic ossification were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All cases were followed up for 6 months. There was no significant difference in incision length, intraoperative bleeding and postoperative drainage between two groups(<i>P</i>>0.05). However, the operation time of the test group was shorter than that of the control group (<i>P</i><0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in fracture reduction and hip function between two groups (<i>P</i>>0.05). The hip abduction muscle strength of test group was better than that of control group(<i>P</i><0.05). In addition, there was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications and heterotopic ossification between two groups(<i>P</i>>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with the standard K-L approach, the posterior hemipelvectomy of the greater trochanter approach can shorten the operative time, has better recovery of the postoperative hip abduction muscle strength, exposes the view of the fracture involving the more comminuted posterior acetabulum wall or the fracture of the roof of the socket, improved the rate of fracture anatomical repositioning, provides a new idea for the clinical treatment of posterior acetabulum wall fractures, and allows patients to perform functional exercises at an early stage.</p>","PeriodicalId":23964,"journal":{"name":"Zhongguo gu shang = China journal of orthopaedics and traumatology","volume":"37 8","pages":"786-92"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zhongguo gu shang = China journal of orthopaedics and traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20221109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of the posterior hemipelvectomy of the greater trochanter approach with the standard Kocher-Langenbeck(K-L) approach in the treatment of posterior acetabulum wall fractures and to explore a more optimal approach for the treatment of posterior acetabulum wall fractures.

Methods: Total of 26 patients with posterior acetabulum wall fractures were retrospectively analysed and divided into two groups:the posterior hemipelvectomy of the greater trochanter group (test group) and the standard K-L approach group (control group). In the test group, there were 24 patients including 16 males and 8 females with an average age of (42.00±4.52) years old, the time of injury to surgery was (6.75±1.15) d. In the control group, there were 23 patients including 16 males and 7 females with an average age of (41.00±5.82) years old, the time of injury to surgery was (7.09±1.20) days. The total hospital stay, length of incision, operation time, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative drainage, discharge, fracture reduction quality (Matta criteria), hip abduction muscle strength, hip function (Merle d'Aubigne-Postel score), postoperative complications and the incidence of ectopic ossification were compared.

Results: All cases were followed up for 6 months. There was no significant difference in incision length, intraoperative bleeding and postoperative drainage between two groups(P>0.05). However, the operation time of the test group was shorter than that of the control group (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in fracture reduction and hip function between two groups (P>0.05). The hip abduction muscle strength of test group was better than that of control group(P<0.05). In addition, there was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications and heterotopic ossification between two groups(P>0.05).

Conclusion: Compared with the standard K-L approach, the posterior hemipelvectomy of the greater trochanter approach can shorten the operative time, has better recovery of the postoperative hip abduction muscle strength, exposes the view of the fracture involving the more comminuted posterior acetabulum wall or the fracture of the roof of the socket, improved the rate of fracture anatomical repositioning, provides a new idea for the clinical treatment of posterior acetabulum wall fractures, and allows patients to perform functional exercises at an early stage.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[在治疗髋臼后壁骨折时,比较大转子后半切除术方法和标准的 Kocher-Langenbeck 方法]。
目的比较大转子后半切除术与标准Kocher-Langenbeck(K-L)方法治疗髋臼后壁骨折的临床疗效,探索治疗髋臼后壁骨折的最佳方法:方法:对26例髋臼后壁骨折患者进行回顾性分析,并将其分为两组:大转子后半切除术组(试验组)和标准K-L方法组(对照组)。试验组 24 例,其中男性 16 例,女性 8 例,平均年龄(42.00±4.52)岁,受伤至手术时间(6.75±1.15)天;对照组 23 例,其中男性 16 例,女性 7 例,平均年龄(41.00±5.82)岁,受伤至手术时间(7.09±1.20)天。比较了总住院时间、切口长度、手术时间、术中出血量、术后引流量、出院情况、骨折复位质量(Matta标准)、髋关节外展肌力、髋关节功能(Merle d'Aubigne-Postel评分)、术后并发症和异位骨化发生率:所有病例均接受了 6 个月的随访。两组在切口长度、术中出血量和术后引流量方面无明显差异(P>0.05)。但试验组的手术时间比对照组短(PP>0.05)。试验组的髋关节外展肌力优于对照组(PP>0.05):结论:与标准K-L入路相比,大转子后半切入路可缩短手术时间,术后髋关节外展肌力恢复较好,暴露了涉及髋臼后壁粉碎较多或臼顶骨折的视野,提高了骨折解剖复位率,为髋臼后壁骨折的临床治疗提供了新思路,并可使患者早期进行功能锻炼。
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
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
189
期刊最新文献
[Preliminary application of human-computer interaction CT imaging AI recognition and positioning technology in the treatment of type C1 distal radius fractures]. [Guiding significance of intra-articular sagittal reduction in the treatment of tibial plateau fractures]. [Meta-analysis of the efficacy of plate fixation and external fixator fixation in the treatment of AO-C type distal radius fractures]. [Preoperative diagnostic efficacy of novel blood markers white blood cell ratio and fibrinogen levels in periprosthetic joint infection]. [Short-term clinical efficacy of unilateral external fixator combined with percutaneous Kirschner wire fixation in the treatment of type C1 distal radius fractures in elderly patients].
×
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