劉駿
復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折應(yīng)用解剖鋼板與Liss鋼板內(nèi)固定治療的效果
劉駿①
目的:研究復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折應(yīng)用解剖鋼板與Liss鋼板內(nèi)固定治療的效果。方法:選擇本院2010年1月-2013年1月收治的80例復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折患者,按隨機(jī)數(shù)字表法分為兩組,對(duì)照組采用解剖鋼板內(nèi)固定治療,治療組采用Liss鋼板內(nèi)固定治療,比較兩組的手術(shù)效果。結(jié)果:治療組患者手術(shù)時(shí)間為(85.2±7.4)min,術(shù)中出血量為(199.4±89.2)mL,住院天數(shù)為(6.8±2.1)d,骨折愈合時(shí)間為(3.9±2.3)個(gè)月,總有效率為90.0%,無(wú)術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生,與對(duì)照組比較差異具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05)。結(jié)論:復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折應(yīng)用Liss鋼板內(nèi)固定治療的效果明顯優(yōu)于解剖鋼板內(nèi)固定,不僅能夠提高手術(shù)的總有效率,而且具有安全性高、并發(fā)癥少、骨折恢復(fù)時(shí)間快的優(yōu)點(diǎn),值得臨床推廣使用。
復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折; 解剖鋼板; Liss鋼板; 內(nèi)固定
脛骨平臺(tái)骨折是骨科常見(jiàn)的骨折之一,其發(fā)病率較高,相關(guān)研究報(bào)道顯示脛骨骨折占全身骨折的1%左右,Schatzker根據(jù)其臨床經(jīng)驗(yàn)將本病分為Ⅰ~Ⅵ型六種類(lèi)型,其中Ⅴ、Ⅵ型的脛骨平臺(tái)骨折一般稱(chēng)為復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折,此類(lèi)患者多合并關(guān)節(jié)和周?chē)M織的嚴(yán)重?fù)p傷,治療不及時(shí)易影響膝關(guān)節(jié)功能[1-2]。近年來(lái)隨著暴力損傷因素的增多,復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折的發(fā)病率越來(lái)越高,治療多采用手術(shù)鋼板內(nèi)固定,隨著現(xiàn)代醫(yī)學(xué)的飛速發(fā)展,相較于普通鋼板,解剖鋼板和Liss鋼板具有創(chuàng)傷性小、愈合率高、并發(fā)癥少、生物力學(xué)穩(wěn)定等優(yōu)點(diǎn)[3-4],是目前臨床上普遍使用的內(nèi)固定材料。筆者對(duì)本院收治的復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折患者,分別采用解剖鋼板與Liss鋼板內(nèi)固定治療,現(xiàn)報(bào)道如下。
1.1 一般資料 選擇本院2010年1月-2013年1月收治的80例復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折患者,病例納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):(1)符合脛骨平臺(tái)骨折Schatzker分型中的Ⅴ型、Ⅵ型;(2)具有手術(shù)治療的指征;(3)年齡18周歲以上;(4)無(wú)心肺等嚴(yán)重器質(zhì)性疾??;(5)知情并志愿參加[5]。在征得患者及家屬同意并簽署知情同意書(shū)后,采用隨機(jī)數(shù)字表法分為兩組,治療組中男28例,女12例,年齡31~53歲,平均(42.3±2.8)歲,車(chē)禍者23例,高空墜落者11例,重物砸傷者6例,Schatzker分型Ⅴ型者26例,Ⅵ型者14例,對(duì)照組中男22例,女18例,年齡32~51歲,平均(44.2±3.1)歲,車(chē)禍者19例,高空墜落者16例,重物砸傷者5例,Schatzker分型Ⅴ型者24例,Ⅵ型者16例,兩組一般資料比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),具有可比性。
1.2 方法 兩組患者排除手術(shù)相關(guān)禁忌后,在全麻下行內(nèi)固定治療。對(duì)照組采用解剖鋼板內(nèi)固定治療,患者取仰臥位,常規(guī)消毒鋪巾,根據(jù)患者不同骨折類(lèi)型,取膝關(guān)節(jié)內(nèi)側(cè)或外側(cè)切口,暴露脛骨平臺(tái),必要時(shí)給骨質(zhì)缺失較多的部位植骨,以抬高塌陷的脛骨平臺(tái),透視下觀(guān)察骨折處復(fù)位程度,待復(fù)位較好、關(guān)節(jié)面較平整,則行解剖鋼板內(nèi)固定。對(duì)于合并關(guān)節(jié)及周?chē)M織損傷者行對(duì)癥處理。治療組采用Liss鋼板內(nèi)固定治療,患者取仰臥位,常規(guī)消毒鋪巾,根據(jù)患者不同骨折類(lèi)型,選擇膝關(guān)節(jié)內(nèi)側(cè)緣、外側(cè)緣合適切口,切開(kāi)關(guān)節(jié)囊,上拉半月板暴露脛骨平臺(tái),有骨質(zhì)缺損者予植骨,在C型臂機(jī)X線(xiàn)檢查下觀(guān)察骨折復(fù)位程度,待復(fù)位較好、關(guān)節(jié)面平整及下肢力線(xiàn)恢復(fù)后,將合適的Liss鋼板置入皮下行內(nèi)固定治療,X線(xiàn)下確認(rèn)鋼板位置正確后,在導(dǎo)向裝置輔助下擰入鎖定螺釘,經(jīng)皮打入遠(yuǎn)端螺釘,確保骨折兩端有3枚以上螺釘輔助固定。
1.3 療效評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn) 觀(guān)察兩組患者的手術(shù)時(shí)間、術(shù)中出血量、住院天數(shù)及骨折愈合時(shí)間,評(píng)判兩組患者術(shù)后的療效,根據(jù)術(shù)后疼痛、關(guān)節(jié)活動(dòng)度、關(guān)節(jié)功能、關(guān)節(jié)穩(wěn)定性等進(jìn)行評(píng)分[6],制定療效評(píng)判,顯效>80分,有效為60~80分,無(wú)效<60分,總有效=顯效+有效。
1.4 統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)處理 采用SPSS 17.0 統(tǒng)計(jì)軟件對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行分析。計(jì)量資料以(±s)表示,采用t檢驗(yàn),計(jì)數(shù)資料采用 χ2檢驗(yàn),P<0.05為差異具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
2.1 兩組手術(shù)情況比較 治療組患者手術(shù)時(shí)間、術(shù)中出血量、住院天數(shù)、骨折愈合時(shí)間術(shù)后并發(fā)癥例數(shù)均明顯低于對(duì)照組患者,差異均具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05),見(jiàn)表1。
表1 兩組手術(shù)情況比較
2.2 兩組療效比較 治療組患者總有效率為90.0%,明顯高于對(duì)照組的82.5%,兩組比較差異具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05),見(jiàn)表2。
表2 兩組療效比較 例(%)
復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折是骨科常見(jiàn)的疾病之一,多因高能量創(chuàng)傷所致,患者常常并發(fā)關(guān)節(jié)和周?chē)浗M織的損傷,給臨床治療帶來(lái)了較大的難度。傳統(tǒng)對(duì)于復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折患者的治療多采用普通鋼板進(jìn)行內(nèi)固定[7-8],然而傳統(tǒng)手術(shù)往往創(chuàng)傷面積較大,術(shù)后骨折愈合程度較差,皮膚容易并發(fā)感染、壞死等情況,目前已經(jīng)漸漸退出歷史舞臺(tái)。隨著科學(xué)技術(shù)的蓬勃發(fā)展,現(xiàn)代醫(yī)學(xué)水平得到了顯著提高,相比于普通鋼板,解剖鋼板和Liss鋼板的應(yīng)用大大避免了上述缺點(diǎn)[9-11],越來(lái)越受到患者的青睞。
復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折的手術(shù)目標(biāo)是盡量保護(hù)周?chē)浗M織,保留骨折遠(yuǎn)端的血液供應(yīng),最大限度地恢復(fù)關(guān)節(jié)的活動(dòng)度和功能[12]。解剖鋼板是根據(jù)脛骨的解剖生理結(jié)構(gòu)制造的,與自身的骨骼形態(tài)相符,復(fù)位相對(duì)簡(jiǎn)單,但手術(shù)創(chuàng)傷較大,容易誘發(fā)皮膚感染,Liss鋼板則是一種微創(chuàng)內(nèi)固定技術(shù),不僅對(duì)骨折端血供的影響較小,而且對(duì)關(guān)節(jié)固定的穩(wěn)定性較高,但相比于解剖鋼板而言,對(duì)技術(shù)水平要求較高,且價(jià)格相對(duì)較高[13]。通過(guò)上述研究顯示,治療組患者手術(shù)時(shí)間為(85.2±7.4)min,術(shù)中出血量為(199.4±89.2)mL,住院天數(shù)為(6.8±2.1)d,骨折愈合時(shí)間為(3.9±2.3)個(gè)月,總有效率為90.0%,無(wú)術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生,對(duì)照組患者手術(shù)時(shí)間為(91.2±6.7)min,術(shù)中出血量為(217.3±77.5)mL,住院天數(shù)為(8.1±1.9)d,骨折愈合時(shí)間為(4.2±1.4)個(gè)月,總有效率為82.5%,有3例發(fā)生不同程度的術(shù)后并發(fā)癥,兩組以上指標(biāo)比較差異均具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05)。
綜上所述,復(fù)雜性脛骨平臺(tái)骨折應(yīng)用Liss鋼板內(nèi)固定治療的效果明顯優(yōu)于解剖鋼板內(nèi)固定,不僅能夠提高手術(shù)的總有效率,而且具有安全性高、并發(fā)癥少、骨折恢復(fù)時(shí)間快的優(yōu)點(diǎn),值得臨床推廣使用。
[1] Lan-Pu Shang,F(xiàn)ang Zhou,Hong-Quan Ji,et al.Comparison of curative effects between minimally invasive locking plate internal fixation and open reduction with internal fixation for the treatment of proximal humerus fractures[J].Journal of Peking University:Health Sciences, 2013,45(5):711-716.
[2] D-MRouleau,G-YLaflamme,G KBerry,et al.Proximal humerusfractures treated by percutaneous locking plate internal fixation[J]. Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Surgery & Research : OTSR, 2009,95(1):56-62.
[3] Hongchuan Wang,Hua Lou,Kai Liu,et al.An improved reduction technique for depression fractures of lateral tibial plateau[J].Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 2013,27(1):12-16.
[4] Casap N,Kreiner B,Wexler A,et al.Flapless approach for removal of bone graft fixing screws and placement of dental implants using computerized navigation: a technique and case report[J].The International Journal of Oral &; Maxillofacial Implants, 2006,21 (2):314-319.
[5]楊建惠,吳武,牟朋林.鎖定鋼板內(nèi)固定并植骨治療復(fù)雜脛骨平臺(tái)骨折的療效分析[J].中國(guó)醫(yī)學(xué)創(chuàng)新,2014,11(5):19-21.
[6] Yan-xiang Wang,Yun-tong Zhang,Yang Tang,et al.Treatment of comminuted fracture of tibial plateau with ni-ti shape memory alloy bow-teeth screws combined with locking plate internal fixation[J]. China Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2013,26(7):601-604.
[7] Hui Wang,Da-Wei Bi,Gang-Feng Hu,et al. Anatomical study on the treatment of complex acetabular fractures with selfdesigned 3-dimensional anatoimical locking plate[J].China Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2013,26(2):149-152.
[8]徐華,蔡宇,李文成,等.外側(cè)鎖定鋼板聯(lián)合內(nèi)側(cè)支持鋼板與雙支持鋼板治療復(fù)雜脛骨平臺(tái)骨折的療效對(duì)比[J].中國(guó)老年學(xué)雜志,2013,33(11):2554-2556.
[9] Siddesh NDodabassappa, Hitesh HShah,BenjaminJoseph.Donor site morbidity following the harvesting of cortical bone graft from the tibia in children[J].Journal of Children's Orthopaedics, 2010,4(5):417-421.
[10] Ana CarolinaHawthorne, Samuel PorfírioXavier,RobertaOkamoto,et al.Immunohistochemical, tomographic, and histological study on onlay bone graft remodeling. Part III: allografts[J].Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2013,24(10):1164-1172.
[11] Simon YTang,Ralf-PeteHerber,Sunita PHo,et al.Matrix metalloproteinase-13 is required for osteocytic perilacunar remodeling and maintains bone fracture resistance[J].Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 2012,27(9):1936-1950.
[12] Pawel Szulc, StéphanieBoutroy,NicolasVilayphiou,et al.Crosssectional analysis of the association between fragility fractures and bone microarchitecture in older men: the STRAMBO study[J].Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 2011,26(6):1358-1367.
[13] L B Solomon, S A Callary,A WStevenson,et al.Weight-bearinginduced displacement and migration over time of fracture fragments following split depression fractures of the lateral tibial plateau: a case series with radiostereometric analysis[J].The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume, 2011,93(6):817-823.
The Effect of AnatomicaI PIate and Liss PIate InternaI Fixation in Treatment of CompIex tibiaI PIateau Fracture
/LIU Jun.//MedicaI Innovation of China,2014,11(23):145-147
Objective:To study the effect of anatomical plate and Liss plate internal fixation in treatment of complex tibial plateau fracture.Method:80 cases of complex tibial plateau fractures were selected in our hospital from January 2010 to January 2013 ,and were randomly divided into two groups according by random digit table, the control group was treated with anatomical plate fixation, the treatment group was treated with Liss plate internal fixation operation,effects of the two groups were compared.ResuIt:The operation time in the treatment group was (85.2±7.4)min ,intraoperative blood loss was (199.4± 89.2)mL,length of hospital stay was (6.8±2.1)d,fracture healing time was (3.9±2.3) months, the total effective rate was 90%, and no postoperative complications,the differences between the two groups were all significant(P<0.05).ConcIusion:The effect of complex fractures of the tibial plateau by Liss plate internal fixation treatment is better than anatomic plate internal fixation , that it can not only improve the efficiency of operation, but also has the advantages of high safety, less complications and faster recovery, is worthy of clinical application.
Tibial plateau fracture; Anatomical plate; Liss plate; Internal fixation
10.3969/j.issn.1674-4985.2014.23.050
2014-02-12) (本文編輯:陳丹云)
①江西省會(huì)昌縣人民醫(yī)院 江西 會(huì)昌 342600
劉駿
First-author’s address:The PeopIe’s HospitaI of Huichang County ,Huichang 342600,China