改良哈丁格法治疗皮普金 IV 型股骨头骨折的效果不逊于转子翻转截骨术:对 40 例患者的比较研究。

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-15 DOI:10.1007/s00068-024-02547-2
I-Jung Chen, Ying-Chao Chou, Po-Ju Lai, Yung-Heng Hsu, Yi-Hsun Yu
{"title":"改良哈丁格法治疗皮普金 IV 型股骨头骨折的效果不逊于转子翻转截骨术:对 40 例患者的比较研究。","authors":"I-Jung Chen, Ying-Chao Chou, Po-Ju Lai, Yung-Heng Hsu, Yi-Hsun Yu","doi":"10.1007/s00068-024-02547-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the modified Hardinge approach and trochanteric flip osteotomy for the treatment of Pipkin type IV femoral head fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> This retrospective study included 40 patients who underwent surgical treatment for Pipkin type IV femoral head fractures between 2011 and 2020 and completed at least 1 year of follow-up. The clinical outcome of the Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score and radiological outcomes, including the quality of the fracture reduction, osteonecrosis of the femoral head, posttraumatic osteoarthritis, and heterotopic ossification, were compared between the two groups. Conversion to total hip replacement was recorded as the main outcome measure, analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curve and log-rank test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen and 21 patients were treated using the modified Hardinge approach (Group A) and trochanteric flip osteotomy (Group B), respectively. The estimated surgical blood loss was significantly higher in Group B (500.00 ± 315.44 mL vs. 246.32 ± 141.35 mL; P = 0.002). Two patients in Group B complained of discomfort caused by the trochanteric screws and requested implant removal. Radiographic outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups. Clinical outcomes assessed using the Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score 1 year after injury were nearly identical (P = 0.836). Four (21.1%) patients in Group A and three (14.3%) patients in Group B underwent conversion to total hip replacement during the follow-up period; the log-rank test showed no significant difference (P = 0.796).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The modified Hardinge approach resulted in reduced blood loss, with clinical and radiological outcomes similar to those of trochanteric osteotomy; thus, it is an acceptable alternative to trochanteric flip osteotomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":12064,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"1859-1867"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11458743/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The modified Hardinge approach is not inferior to trochanteric flip osteotomy for Pipkin type IV femoral head fractures: a comparative study in 40 patients.\",\"authors\":\"I-Jung Chen, Ying-Chao Chou, Po-Ju Lai, Yung-Heng Hsu, Yi-Hsun Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00068-024-02547-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the modified Hardinge approach and trochanteric flip osteotomy for the treatment of Pipkin type IV femoral head fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> This retrospective study included 40 patients who underwent surgical treatment for Pipkin type IV femoral head fractures between 2011 and 2020 and completed at least 1 year of follow-up. The clinical outcome of the Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score and radiological outcomes, including the quality of the fracture reduction, osteonecrosis of the femoral head, posttraumatic osteoarthritis, and heterotopic ossification, were compared between the two groups. Conversion to total hip replacement was recorded as the main outcome measure, analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curve and log-rank test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen and 21 patients were treated using the modified Hardinge approach (Group A) and trochanteric flip osteotomy (Group B), respectively. The estimated surgical blood loss was significantly higher in Group B (500.00 ± 315.44 mL vs. 246.32 ± 141.35 mL; P = 0.002). Two patients in Group B complained of discomfort caused by the trochanteric screws and requested implant removal. Radiographic outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups. Clinical outcomes assessed using the Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score 1 year after injury were nearly identical (P = 0.836). Four (21.1%) patients in Group A and three (14.3%) patients in Group B underwent conversion to total hip replacement during the follow-up period; the log-rank test showed no significant difference (P = 0.796).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The modified Hardinge approach resulted in reduced blood loss, with clinical and radiological outcomes similar to those of trochanteric osteotomy; thus, it is an acceptable alternative to trochanteric flip osteotomy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1859-1867\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11458743/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-024-02547-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-024-02547-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较改良Hardinge方法和转子翻转截骨术治疗Pipkin IV型股骨头骨折的效果: 这项回顾性研究纳入了在2011年至2020年期间接受手术治疗的40例Pipkin IV型股骨头骨折患者,并完成了至少1年的随访。比较了两组患者的临床结果(Merle d'Aubigné-Postel评分)和放射学结果(包括骨折复位质量、股骨头坏死、创伤后骨关节炎和异位骨化)。转为全髋关节置换术作为主要结果指标,通过卡普兰-梅耶曲线和对数秩检验进行分析:分别有19名和21名患者接受了改良Hardinge方法(A组)和转子翻转截骨术(B组)治疗。B 组的估计手术失血量明显更高(500.00 ± 315.44 mL vs. 246.32 ± 141.35 mL; P = 0.002)。B 组中有两名患者抱怨转子螺钉造成不适,要求移除植入物。两组患者的影像学结果无明显差异。受伤 1 年后使用 Merle d'Aubigné-Postel 评分评估的临床结果几乎相同(P = 0.836)。在随访期间,A组有4名患者(21.1%)和B组有3名患者(14.3%)接受了全髋关节置换术;对数秩检验结果显示,两组患者没有明显差异(P = 0.796):结论:改良Hardinge方法减少了失血量,临床和放射学结果与转子截骨术相似,因此是一种可接受的转子翻转截骨术替代方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
The modified Hardinge approach is not inferior to trochanteric flip osteotomy for Pipkin type IV femoral head fractures: a comparative study in 40 patients.

Purpose: To compare the modified Hardinge approach and trochanteric flip osteotomy for the treatment of Pipkin type IV femoral head fractures.

Methods:  This retrospective study included 40 patients who underwent surgical treatment for Pipkin type IV femoral head fractures between 2011 and 2020 and completed at least 1 year of follow-up. The clinical outcome of the Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score and radiological outcomes, including the quality of the fracture reduction, osteonecrosis of the femoral head, posttraumatic osteoarthritis, and heterotopic ossification, were compared between the two groups. Conversion to total hip replacement was recorded as the main outcome measure, analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curve and log-rank test.

Results: Nineteen and 21 patients were treated using the modified Hardinge approach (Group A) and trochanteric flip osteotomy (Group B), respectively. The estimated surgical blood loss was significantly higher in Group B (500.00 ± 315.44 mL vs. 246.32 ± 141.35 mL; P = 0.002). Two patients in Group B complained of discomfort caused by the trochanteric screws and requested implant removal. Radiographic outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups. Clinical outcomes assessed using the Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score 1 year after injury were nearly identical (P = 0.836). Four (21.1%) patients in Group A and three (14.3%) patients in Group B underwent conversion to total hip replacement during the follow-up period; the log-rank test showed no significant difference (P = 0.796).

Conclusions: The modified Hardinge approach resulted in reduced blood loss, with clinical and radiological outcomes similar to those of trochanteric osteotomy; thus, it is an acceptable alternative to trochanteric flip osteotomy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
311
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery aims to open an interdisciplinary forum that allows for the scientific exchange between basic and clinical science related to pathophysiology, diagnostics and treatment of traumatized patients. The journal covers all aspects of clinical management, operative treatment and related research of traumatic injuries. Clinical and experimental papers on issues relevant for the improvement of trauma care are published. Reviews, original articles, short communications and letters allow the appropriate presentation of major and minor topics.
期刊最新文献
Initial surgical management of injuries to the lower extremities in patients with multiple and/or severe injuries - A systematic review and clinical practice guideline update. 23rd European Congress of Trauma and Emergency Surgery. Cerebral haemodynamics and intracranial pressure during haemorrhagic shock and resuscitation with total endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta in an animal model. Focus on thoracolumbar spine injuries. Evaluating predictors of mortality in octogenarians undergoing urgent or emergent trauma laparotomy.
×
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