青壮年锁骨中轴移位骨折的手术治疗方案:钢板固定与髓内钉。

IF 1.8 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow Pub Date : 2024-11-08 DOI:10.5397/cise.2024.00605
Ji Un Kim, Ji Young Yoon, Hyung Jun Park, Jung Ho Park
{"title":"青壮年锁骨中轴移位骨折的手术治疗方案:钢板固定与髓内钉。","authors":"Ji Un Kim, Ji Young Yoon, Hyung Jun Park, Jung Ho Park","doi":"10.5397/cise.2024.00605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to compare the outcomes and complications of active young adults undergoing open reduction and plate fixation (ORPF) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) for displaced midshaft clavicle fractures (MCFs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review was performed on all patients undergoing ORPF and IMN of complete MCFs at a single center between 2018 and 2022. Patients who were younger than 60 years with radiographic follow-up until union were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 33.1 years. Outcome measures were achievement of union, time to healing, residual deformity, complications, and need for additional procedures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 39 patients, 29 underwent ORPF and 10 underwent IMN. Plate fixation provided faster functional recovery in the first 6 months, but no difference was observed after 1 year. All fractures in the IMN group healed (100%), compared to 90% in the ORPF group (P=0.08). Mean time to union was 21±8.9 weeks and was significantly different between the two groups (P<0.01), with the ORPF group averaging 23.1 weeks and the IMN group 20.8 weeks. Nonunion rates were higher in the ORPF group (10.3%) than in the IMN group (0.0%), but the difference was not significant (P=0.10).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both methods restored patients to their pre-injury functional levels. However, IMN, with its higher healing rate, fewer required revision surgeries, and lower incisional numbness, appears to be the preferred method for treating MSFs without comminution in young adults. Level of evidence: III.</p>","PeriodicalId":33981,"journal":{"name":"Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surgical treatment options of displaced midshaft fractures of the clavicle in young adults: plate fixation versus intramedullary nailing.\",\"authors\":\"Ji Un Kim, Ji Young Yoon, Hyung Jun Park, Jung Ho Park\",\"doi\":\"10.5397/cise.2024.00605\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to compare the outcomes and complications of active young adults undergoing open reduction and plate fixation (ORPF) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) for displaced midshaft clavicle fractures (MCFs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review was performed on all patients undergoing ORPF and IMN of complete MCFs at a single center between 2018 and 2022. Patients who were younger than 60 years with radiographic follow-up until union were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 33.1 years. Outcome measures were achievement of union, time to healing, residual deformity, complications, and need for additional procedures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 39 patients, 29 underwent ORPF and 10 underwent IMN. Plate fixation provided faster functional recovery in the first 6 months, but no difference was observed after 1 year. All fractures in the IMN group healed (100%), compared to 90% in the ORPF group (P=0.08). Mean time to union was 21±8.9 weeks and was significantly different between the two groups (P<0.01), with the ORPF group averaging 23.1 weeks and the IMN group 20.8 weeks. Nonunion rates were higher in the ORPF group (10.3%) than in the IMN group (0.0%), but the difference was not significant (P=0.10).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both methods restored patients to their pre-injury functional levels. However, IMN, with its higher healing rate, fewer required revision surgeries, and lower incisional numbness, appears to be the preferred method for treating MSFs without comminution in young adults. Level of evidence: III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":33981,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5397/cise.2024.00605\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5397/cise.2024.00605","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究背景本研究旨在比较接受切开复位钢板固定术(ORPF)和髓内钉固定术(IMN)治疗移位锁骨中轴骨折(MCFs)的活跃青壮年患者的治疗效果和并发症:对2018年至2022年期间在一个中心接受ORPF和IMN治疗的所有完全性MCF患者进行回顾性研究。研究纳入了年龄小于60岁、接受放射学随访直至骨结合的患者。患者的平均年龄为 33.1 岁。结果测量指标包括骨结合的实现情况、愈合时间、残余畸形、并发症以及是否需要额外手术:39名患者中,29人接受了ORPF,10人接受了IMN。钢板固定在头 6 个月的功能恢复较快,但 1 年后未观察到差异。IMN组所有骨折均愈合(100%),而ORPF组为90%(P=0.08)。平均愈合时间为 21±8.9 周,两组之间存在显著差异(PConclusions:两种方法都能使患者恢复到受伤前的功能水平。然而,IMN的愈合率更高、所需翻修手术更少、切口麻木感更低,似乎是治疗青壮年无粉碎性MSF的首选方法。证据等级:III.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Surgical treatment options of displaced midshaft fractures of the clavicle in young adults: plate fixation versus intramedullary nailing.

Background: This study aimed to compare the outcomes and complications of active young adults undergoing open reduction and plate fixation (ORPF) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) for displaced midshaft clavicle fractures (MCFs).

Methods: A retrospective review was performed on all patients undergoing ORPF and IMN of complete MCFs at a single center between 2018 and 2022. Patients who were younger than 60 years with radiographic follow-up until union were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 33.1 years. Outcome measures were achievement of union, time to healing, residual deformity, complications, and need for additional procedures.

Results: Of 39 patients, 29 underwent ORPF and 10 underwent IMN. Plate fixation provided faster functional recovery in the first 6 months, but no difference was observed after 1 year. All fractures in the IMN group healed (100%), compared to 90% in the ORPF group (P=0.08). Mean time to union was 21±8.9 weeks and was significantly different between the two groups (P<0.01), with the ORPF group averaging 23.1 weeks and the IMN group 20.8 weeks. Nonunion rates were higher in the ORPF group (10.3%) than in the IMN group (0.0%), but the difference was not significant (P=0.10).

Conclusions: Both methods restored patients to their pre-injury functional levels. However, IMN, with its higher healing rate, fewer required revision surgeries, and lower incisional numbness, appears to be the preferred method for treating MSFs without comminution in young adults. Level of evidence: III.

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
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Short-term outcomes of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty with biceps augmentation of subscapularis peel repair. Descriptive analysis of total elbow arthroplasty for distal humerus fractures: 30-day complications. Learning curve for the open Latarjet procedure: a single-surgeon study. Outcomes of lateralized reverse total shoulder arthroplasty versus latissimus dorsi transfer for external rotation deficit: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reconsidering the clinical outcomes of the stemless reverse total shoulder arthroplasty design implant.
×
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