Comparison of the efficacy of intramedullary nailing via the lateral parapatellar approach versus the infrapatellar approach in the treatment of tibial metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction fractures.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research Pub Date : 2024-12-19 DOI:10.1186/s13018-024-05338-y
Xin Cao, Qingxiang Tang, Bingxin Zhou, Wei Xiao, Huijin Chen
{"title":"Comparison of the efficacy of intramedullary nailing via the lateral parapatellar approach versus the infrapatellar approach in the treatment of tibial metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction fractures.","authors":"Xin Cao, Qingxiang Tang, Bingxin Zhou, Wei Xiao, Huijin Chen","doi":"10.1186/s13018-024-05338-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To compare the efficacy of intramedullary nailing via the lateral parapatellar approach versus the infrapatellar approach in treating fractures at the tibial metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 45 patients with proximal or distal tibial fractures treated with intramedullary nailing via lateral parapatellar approach (n = 23) or infrapatellar approach (n = 22) between January 2019 and March 2023. We recorded and compared the operative time, intraoperative blood loss/fluoroscopies, success rate of closed reduction, anteroposterior and lateral entry point accuracy, postoperative infection, fracture healing time, as well as NRS pain scores, Lysholm knee function scores, and knee range of motion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both groups completed the surgery without any complications. The lateral parapatellar approach group had significantly better results regarding shorter operative time, less intraoperative blood loss, and fewer intraoperative fluoroscopies compared to the infrapatellar approach group (P < 0.05). All cases in the lateral parapatellar approach group achieved closed reduction, while 10 cases in the infrapatellar approach group required open reduction. Fractures in both groups healed successfully, without statistically difference in healing time (P > 0.05). The accuracy of anteroposterior and lateral entry points was better with lateral parapatellar approach (P < 0.05). At 3 and 12 months postoperatively, lateral parapatellar approach showed better Lysholm and NRS scores compared to infrapatellar approach (P < 0.05). Two groups had no significant difference in range of motion (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Lateral parapatellar approach combined with the blocking screw technique provides superior clinical outcomes compared to infrapatellar approach in the treatment of proximal or distal tibial fractures, making it suitable for further investigation.</p>","PeriodicalId":16629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","volume":"19 1","pages":"838"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11656785/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05338-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To compare the efficacy of intramedullary nailing via the lateral parapatellar approach versus the infrapatellar approach in treating fractures at the tibial metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 45 patients with proximal or distal tibial fractures treated with intramedullary nailing via lateral parapatellar approach (n = 23) or infrapatellar approach (n = 22) between January 2019 and March 2023. We recorded and compared the operative time, intraoperative blood loss/fluoroscopies, success rate of closed reduction, anteroposterior and lateral entry point accuracy, postoperative infection, fracture healing time, as well as NRS pain scores, Lysholm knee function scores, and knee range of motion.

Results: Both groups completed the surgery without any complications. The lateral parapatellar approach group had significantly better results regarding shorter operative time, less intraoperative blood loss, and fewer intraoperative fluoroscopies compared to the infrapatellar approach group (P < 0.05). All cases in the lateral parapatellar approach group achieved closed reduction, while 10 cases in the infrapatellar approach group required open reduction. Fractures in both groups healed successfully, without statistically difference in healing time (P > 0.05). The accuracy of anteroposterior and lateral entry points was better with lateral parapatellar approach (P < 0.05). At 3 and 12 months postoperatively, lateral parapatellar approach showed better Lysholm and NRS scores compared to infrapatellar approach (P < 0.05). Two groups had no significant difference in range of motion (P > 0.05).

Conclusions: Lateral parapatellar approach combined with the blocking screw technique provides superior clinical outcomes compared to infrapatellar approach in the treatment of proximal or distal tibial fractures, making it suitable for further investigation.

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
经外侧髌旁入路与髌下入路髓内钉治疗胫骨干骺端-干骺端骨折的疗效比较。
背景:比较经外侧髌旁入路髓内钉与经髌下入路治疗胫骨干骺端-干骺端骨折的疗效。方法:回顾性分析2019年1月至2023年3月经外侧髌旁入路(n = 23)或髌下入路(n = 22)髓内钉治疗胫骨近端或远端骨折45例的临床资料。我们记录并比较手术时间、术中出血量/透视、闭合复位成功率、前后侧入路点准确性、术后感染、骨折愈合时间、NRS疼痛评分、Lysholm膝关节功能评分和膝关节活动范围。结果:两组均完成手术,无并发症发生。髌旁外侧入路组手术时间短,术中出血量少,术中透视次数少,均明显优于髌下入路组(P < 0.05)。外侧髌旁入路的前后外侧入路点的准确性较好(P < 0.05)。结论:髌旁外侧入路联合阻断螺钉技术治疗胫骨近端或远端骨折的临床效果优于髌下入路,值得进一步研究。
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
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
494
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of clinical and basic research studies related to musculoskeletal issues. Orthopaedic research is conducted at clinical and basic science levels. With the advancement of new technologies and the increasing expectation and demand from doctors and patients, we are witnessing an enormous growth in clinical orthopaedic research, particularly in the fields of traumatology, spinal surgery, joint replacement, sports medicine, musculoskeletal tumour management, hand microsurgery, foot and ankle surgery, paediatric orthopaedic, and orthopaedic rehabilitation. The involvement of basic science ranges from molecular, cellular, structural and functional perspectives to tissue engineering, gait analysis, automation and robotic surgery. Implant and biomaterial designs are new disciplines that complement clinical applications. JOSR encourages the publication of multidisciplinary research with collaboration amongst clinicians and scientists from different disciplines, which will be the trend in the coming decades.
期刊最新文献
The validation and cross-cultural adaptation of the PainDETECT questionnaire in osteoarthritis-related pain. Healing beyond bone: a qualitative study of the core decompression experience of physically active patients with stage II hip avascular necrosis. NEDD4 family E3 ligases in osteoporosis: mechanisms and emerging potential therapeutic targets. Risk factors for mechanical complications in degenerative lumbar scoliosis with concomitant thoracolumbar kyphosis: does the selection of the upper instrumented vertebra matter? Efficacy and safety of long fusion versus short fusion in degenerative scoliosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
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