不稳定骨折桡骨头置换术后进一步手术的高风险:至少随访8年的长期结果

Caroline Cristofaro, T. Carter, N. Wickramasinghe, M. McQueen, T. White, A. Duckworth
{"title":"不稳定骨折桡骨头置换术后进一步手术的高风险:至少随访8年的长期结果","authors":"Caroline Cristofaro, T. Carter, N. Wickramasinghe, M. McQueen, T. White, A. Duckworth","doi":"10.1097/CORR.0000000000000876","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nThe evidence for treating acute, unreconstructable radial head fractures in unstable elbows with radial head replacement predominantly consists of short- to mid-term follow-up studies with a heterogenous mix of implants and operative techniques. Data on longer-term patient-reported outcomes after radial head replacement is lacking.\n\n\nQUESTIONS/PURPOSES\n(1) What proportion of patients undergo revision or implant removal after radial head replacement? (2) At a minimum of 8 years follow-up, what are the patient-reported outcomes (QuickDASH, Oxford Elbow Score, and EuroQol-5D)? (3) What factors are associated with a superior long-term patient-reported outcome, according to the QuickDASH?\n\n\nMETHODS\nBetween September 1994 and September 2010, we surgically treated 157 patients for acute radial head fractures. We excluded patients where the radial head was excised (n = 21), internally fixed (n = 15), or replaced as a secondary procedure after failed internal fixation (n = 2). A total of 119 patients who underwent radial head replacement surgery for an acute unreconstructable fracture were included, with a mean age of 50 years (range 15 to 93 ± 19 years), and 53% of patients (63) were women. All but two implants were uncemented, loose-fitting, monopolar prostheses, of which 86% (102) were metallic and 14% (17) were silastic. Implants were only cemented if they appeared unstable within the proximal radius. Silastic implants were used in the earlier series and replaced by metallic implants starting in 2000. We reviewed electronic records to document postoperative complications and prosthesis revision and removal. A member of the local research team (THC, CDC) who was not previously involved in patient care contacted patients to confirm complications, reoperations and to obtain long-term patient-reported outcomes scores. Nineteen patients had died at the point of outcome score collection. Of the remaining 100 patients, 80 were contacted (67% of total cohort), at a median of 11 years (range 8 to 24 years) after injury. The primary outcome measure was the QuickDASH score.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOf 119 patients, 25% (30) underwent reoperation, with three patients undergoing revision and 27 patients undergoing prosthesis removal at a median of 7 months (range 0 to 125 months). Twenty-one of 30 procedures (70%) occurred within 1 year after implantation. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis demonstrated a cumulative implant survival rate of 71%. In the 80 patients contacted, the mean QuickDASH score was 13 ± 14, the mean Oxford Elbow Score was 43 ± 6, and the median EuroQol-5D score was 0.8 (-0.3 to 1.0). After controlling for covariates, we found that prothesis revision or removal (p = 0.466) and prosthesis type (p = 0.553) were not associated with patient-reported outcome, according to the QuickDASH.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nThe management of acute unreconstructable fractures of the radial head in unstable elbow injuries with radial head replacement has a high risk of reoperation. Patients must be counselled regarding this risk of secondary intervention, of which the peak risk appears to be within 1 year after implantation. Despite this, patients report low disability according to the QuickDASH at a minimum follow-up of 8 years.\n\n\nLEVEL OF EVIDENCE\nLevel IV, therapeutic study.","PeriodicalId":10465,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"23","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"High Risk of Further Surgery After Radial Head Replacement for Unstable Fractures: Longer-term Outcomes at a Minimum Follow-up of 8 Years.\",\"authors\":\"Caroline Cristofaro, T. Carter, N. Wickramasinghe, M. McQueen, T. White, A. Duckworth\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/CORR.0000000000000876\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\nThe evidence for treating acute, unreconstructable radial head fractures in unstable elbows with radial head replacement predominantly consists of short- to mid-term follow-up studies with a heterogenous mix of implants and operative techniques. Data on longer-term patient-reported outcomes after radial head replacement is lacking.\\n\\n\\nQUESTIONS/PURPOSES\\n(1) What proportion of patients undergo revision or implant removal after radial head replacement? (2) At a minimum of 8 years follow-up, what are the patient-reported outcomes (QuickDASH, Oxford Elbow Score, and EuroQol-5D)? (3) What factors are associated with a superior long-term patient-reported outcome, according to the QuickDASH?\\n\\n\\nMETHODS\\nBetween September 1994 and September 2010, we surgically treated 157 patients for acute radial head fractures. We excluded patients where the radial head was excised (n = 21), internally fixed (n = 15), or replaced as a secondary procedure after failed internal fixation (n = 2). A total of 119 patients who underwent radial head replacement surgery for an acute unreconstructable fracture were included, with a mean age of 50 years (range 15 to 93 ± 19 years), and 53% of patients (63) were women. All but two implants were uncemented, loose-fitting, monopolar prostheses, of which 86% (102) were metallic and 14% (17) were silastic. Implants were only cemented if they appeared unstable within the proximal radius. Silastic implants were used in the earlier series and replaced by metallic implants starting in 2000. We reviewed electronic records to document postoperative complications and prosthesis revision and removal. A member of the local research team (THC, CDC) who was not previously involved in patient care contacted patients to confirm complications, reoperations and to obtain long-term patient-reported outcomes scores. Nineteen patients had died at the point of outcome score collection. Of the remaining 100 patients, 80 were contacted (67% of total cohort), at a median of 11 years (range 8 to 24 years) after injury. The primary outcome measure was the QuickDASH score.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nOf 119 patients, 25% (30) underwent reoperation, with three patients undergoing revision and 27 patients undergoing prosthesis removal at a median of 7 months (range 0 to 125 months). Twenty-one of 30 procedures (70%) occurred within 1 year after implantation. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis demonstrated a cumulative implant survival rate of 71%. In the 80 patients contacted, the mean QuickDASH score was 13 ± 14, the mean Oxford Elbow Score was 43 ± 6, and the median EuroQol-5D score was 0.8 (-0.3 to 1.0). After controlling for covariates, we found that prothesis revision or removal (p = 0.466) and prosthesis type (p = 0.553) were not associated with patient-reported outcome, according to the QuickDASH.\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSIONS\\nThe management of acute unreconstructable fractures of the radial head in unstable elbow injuries with radial head replacement has a high risk of reoperation. Patients must be counselled regarding this risk of secondary intervention, of which the peak risk appears to be within 1 year after implantation. Despite this, patients report low disability according to the QuickDASH at a minimum follow-up of 8 years.\\n\\n\\nLEVEL OF EVIDENCE\\nLevel IV, therapeutic study.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"23\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000000876\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000000876","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

摘要

背景:桡骨头置换术治疗不稳定肘关节急性不可重建桡骨头骨折的证据主要包括短期到中期的随访研究,这些研究采用了不同的植入物和手术技术。问题/目的(1)桡骨头置换术后,有多少比例的患者接受翻修或植入物移除?(2)在至少8年的随访中,患者报告的结果(QuickDASH、牛津肘评分和EuroQol-5D)是什么?(3)根据QuickDASH,哪些因素与患者报告的较好的长期预后相关?方法1994年9月至2010年9月对157例急性桡骨头骨折患者进行手术治疗。我们排除了桡骨头切除(n = 21)、内固定(n = 15)或内固定失败后作为二次手术进行桡骨头置换(n = 2)的患者。共纳入了119例因急性无法重建骨折接受桡骨头置换手术的患者,平均年龄为50岁(15至93±19岁),53%的患者(63例)为女性。除了两个假体外,所有假体均为非胶结、松散的单极假体,其中86%(102)为金属假体,14%(17)为橡胶假体。只有当植入物在近端桡骨内出现不稳定时才进行骨水泥。硅胶植入物在早期的系列中使用,从2000年开始被金属植入物所取代。我们回顾了电子记录来记录术后并发症和假体翻修和移除。当地研究小组(THC, CDC)的一名成员之前没有参与患者护理,他联系了患者,以确认并发症、再手术并获得患者报告的长期结果评分。19例患者在结局评分收集时死亡。在其余100例患者中,80例(占总队列的67%)在受伤后中位11年(范围8至24年)进行了联系。主要指标是QuickDASH评分。结果119例患者中,25%(30例)再次手术,其中3例进行翻修,27例进行假体移除,中位时间为7个月(0 ~ 125个月)。30例手术中有21例(70%)发生在植入后1年内。Kaplan-Meier生存分析显示植入物的累计存活率为71%。在接触的80例患者中,QuickDASH评分平均值为13±14,Oxford肘部评分平均值为43±6,EuroQol-5D评分中位数为0.8(-0.3 ~ 1.0)。根据QuickDASH,在控制了协变量后,我们发现假体翻修或移除(p = 0.466)和假体类型(p = 0.553)与患者报告的结果无关。结论桡骨头置换术治疗不稳定型肘关节损伤急性桡骨头骨折再手术风险高。必须告知患者这种二次干预的风险,其中风险高峰出现在植入后1年内。尽管如此,根据QuickDASH,在至少8年的随访中,患者报告的残疾程度很低。证据等级:IV级,治疗性研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
High Risk of Further Surgery After Radial Head Replacement for Unstable Fractures: Longer-term Outcomes at a Minimum Follow-up of 8 Years.
BACKGROUND The evidence for treating acute, unreconstructable radial head fractures in unstable elbows with radial head replacement predominantly consists of short- to mid-term follow-up studies with a heterogenous mix of implants and operative techniques. Data on longer-term patient-reported outcomes after radial head replacement is lacking. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES (1) What proportion of patients undergo revision or implant removal after radial head replacement? (2) At a minimum of 8 years follow-up, what are the patient-reported outcomes (QuickDASH, Oxford Elbow Score, and EuroQol-5D)? (3) What factors are associated with a superior long-term patient-reported outcome, according to the QuickDASH? METHODS Between September 1994 and September 2010, we surgically treated 157 patients for acute radial head fractures. We excluded patients where the radial head was excised (n = 21), internally fixed (n = 15), or replaced as a secondary procedure after failed internal fixation (n = 2). A total of 119 patients who underwent radial head replacement surgery for an acute unreconstructable fracture were included, with a mean age of 50 years (range 15 to 93 ± 19 years), and 53% of patients (63) were women. All but two implants were uncemented, loose-fitting, monopolar prostheses, of which 86% (102) were metallic and 14% (17) were silastic. Implants were only cemented if they appeared unstable within the proximal radius. Silastic implants were used in the earlier series and replaced by metallic implants starting in 2000. We reviewed electronic records to document postoperative complications and prosthesis revision and removal. A member of the local research team (THC, CDC) who was not previously involved in patient care contacted patients to confirm complications, reoperations and to obtain long-term patient-reported outcomes scores. Nineteen patients had died at the point of outcome score collection. Of the remaining 100 patients, 80 were contacted (67% of total cohort), at a median of 11 years (range 8 to 24 years) after injury. The primary outcome measure was the QuickDASH score. RESULTS Of 119 patients, 25% (30) underwent reoperation, with three patients undergoing revision and 27 patients undergoing prosthesis removal at a median of 7 months (range 0 to 125 months). Twenty-one of 30 procedures (70%) occurred within 1 year after implantation. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis demonstrated a cumulative implant survival rate of 71%. In the 80 patients contacted, the mean QuickDASH score was 13 ± 14, the mean Oxford Elbow Score was 43 ± 6, and the median EuroQol-5D score was 0.8 (-0.3 to 1.0). After controlling for covariates, we found that prothesis revision or removal (p = 0.466) and prosthesis type (p = 0.553) were not associated with patient-reported outcome, according to the QuickDASH. CONCLUSIONS The management of acute unreconstructable fractures of the radial head in unstable elbow injuries with radial head replacement has a high risk of reoperation. Patients must be counselled regarding this risk of secondary intervention, of which the peak risk appears to be within 1 year after implantation. Despite this, patients report low disability according to the QuickDASH at a minimum follow-up of 8 years. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level IV, therapeutic study.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
CORR Insights®: What is the Geographic Distribution of Women Orthopaedic Surgeons Throughout the United States? What Are the Rates and Trends of Women Authors in Three High-Impact Orthopaedic Journals from 2006-2017? CORR Insights®: Chair Versus Chairman: Does Orthopaedics Use the Gendered Term More Than Other Specialties? CORR Insights®: Does the Proportion of Women in Orthopaedic Leadership Roles Reflect the Gender Composition of Specialty Societies? Women Are at Higher Risk for Concussions Due to Ball or Equipment Contact in Soccer and Lacrosse.
×
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