延长改良后内侧入路与后外侧入路切开复位内固定治疗后Pilon骨折的临床效果

doi:10.20047/j.issn1673-7210.2023.15.19

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (28)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (667 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To explore the clinical effect of extended modified posteromedial approach and posterolateral approach for open reduction and internal fixation of Pilon fractures. Methods A total of 84 patients with posterior Pilon fracture admitted to Suqian First People’s Hospital from May 2018 to May 2021 were selected and they were divided into the extended modified posterior medial approach group (42 cases) and the posterior lateral approach group (42 cases) according to the random number table method. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospitalization time, weight-bearing time, fracture healing time, American Foot and Ankle Surgery Association (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, ankle range of motion, Burrwell-Charnley radiology score, and complication rates were compared in both groups. Results The amount of intraoperative bleeding in the extending the modified posterolateral approach group was less than that in the extending the modified posterolateral approach group(P＜0.05), and the hospitalization time, weight bearing time, and fracture healing time in the extending the modified posterolateral approach group were shorter than those in the extending the modified posterolateral approach group (P＜0.05); at six months after operation, the AOFAS scores of the two groups were higher those at three months after operation, and the prolonged modified posteromedial approach group were higher than the posterolateral approach group (P＜0.05); at six months after operation, the VAS scores in both groups were lower than those at three months after operation, and the extended modified posteromedial approach group was lower than that in the posterolateral approach group (P＜0.05). At six months after operation, the range of motion of ankle dorsiflexion and plantar flexion in both groups were higher than those at three months after operation, and the extended and modified posteromedial approach group was higher than the posterolateral approach group (P＜0.05). The excellent and good rate of the extended and modified posteromedial approach group was higher than that of the posterolateral approach group (P＜0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (P＞0.05). Conclusion Compared with the posterolateral approach, extending the modified posteromedial approach can accelerate fracture healing, improve ankle function, relieve postoperative pain, and improve fracture healing, which is safe and reliable.

Key words： Extended modified posteromedial approach Posterolateral approach Internal fixation Posterior pilon fracture

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	LIU Xiangzhong JIANG Lüetao DENG Jielin▲

Cite this article:

LIU Xiangzhong JIANG Lüetao DENG Jielin▲. Clinical effect of extended modified posteromedial approach and posterolateral approach for open reduction and internal fixation of Pilon fractures[J]. 中国医药导报, 2023, 20(15): 90-94.

URL:

https://www.yiyaodaobao.com.cn/EN/10.20047/j.issn1673-7210.2023.15.19 OR https://www.yiyaodaobao.com.cn/EN/Y2023/V20/I15/90

[1] Jiang Z，Zhang C，Qin JJ，et al. Posterior pilon fracture treated by opening the fibula fracture gap [J]. J Orthop Surg Res，2022，17（1）：214-225.
[2] Zhang ZC，He WB，Lin H. Analysis of the efficacy of a modified posteromedial approach for Klammer Ⅲ posterior Pilon fractures [J]. Chin J Traumatol，2022，25（2）：83-89.
[3] 姜壮，汪国栋，项阳，等.经腓骨骨折线治疗后Pilon骨折的临床疗效[J].中华骨科杂志，2022，42（12）：746-752.
[4] 李晓国，宿显良，赵腾飞.后内侧入路切开复位钢板螺钉内固定治疗后Pilon骨折的疗效分析[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2020，35（2）：201-202.
[5] 刘昌福，张伟，刘水涛，等.后内侧入路复位钢板螺钉内固定治疗后Pilon骨折[J]. 中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2020， 35（4）：422-424.
[6] 骆渊城，王晶，杨威，等.两种手术方式治疗合并腓骨骨折的Rüedi-Allg（o）ver Ⅲ型闭合性Pilon骨折的效果比较[J].中国医药导报，2020，17（9）：78-81.
[7] 刘昌福，张伟，刘水涛，等.后内侧入路复位钢板螺钉内固定治疗后Pilon骨折[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2020， 35（4）：422-424.
[8] 张英泽.临床骨折分型[M].北京：人民卫生出版社，2013：92-93.
[9] 胡远军，成瑞萍，史会明，等.改良前内侧入路治疗Ruedi-Allgower Ⅲ型Pilon骨折的疗效[J].实用骨科杂志，2020，26（2）：124-127.
[10] 张彪，王卫粮，王铁军.采用双切口联合入路360°内固定治疗高能量闭合性Pilon骨折的临床疗效观察[J].临床和实验医学杂志，2020，19（10）：1098-1101.
[11] 梁承伟，黄东辉，刘伟.不同方法置入拉力螺钉内固定治疗Haraguchi Ⅰ型后踝骨折的疗效比较[J].创伤外科杂志，2021，23（7）：516-519.
[12] 沈晖扬，杜光舟.CT指导不同分型后pilon骨折手术的价值观察[J].中国CT和MRI杂志，2020，18（6）：143-146.
[13] Andalib A，Etemadifar MR，Rafiee Zadeh A，et al. Treatment of pilon fractures with low profile plates [J]. Int J Burns Trauma，2021，11（6）：486-493.
[14] 张天宇，王磊.后外侧与双侧骨块空心钉内固定治疗轻度移位KlammerⅡ型后Pilon骨折的疗效比较[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2021，36（8）：873-875.
[15] 王珺琛，曹湘予，杨玉山，等.后外侧联合内踝后侧入路内固定治疗后Pilon骨折[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2020，35（12）：1316-1318.
[16] 李兵兵，王晓燕，翁振.Klammer分型指导后Pilon骨折手术入路选择[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2020，35（10）： 1100-1102.
[17] 胡文帅，范文俊，赵进喜.复杂Pilon骨折患者后外侧联合前内侧入路手术治疗后骨代谢指标、踝关节功能及安全性分析[J].中国医药科学，2021，11（24）：221-224.
[18] 刘中兵，张德荣.后外侧联合前内侧入路治疗复杂Pilon骨折的临床效果[J].中国当代医药，2021，28（35）：83- 86.
[19] 衡科，陶涛，魏辉，等.不同内固定方式联合入路治疗Klammer Ⅲ型后pilon骨折效果[J].实用临床医药杂志，2021，25（12）：66-69.
[20] 尹若丰，丁亚南，田从斌，等.一期闭合复位外固定序贯二期内固定治疗C3型Pilon骨折的临床效果[J].中国医药导报，2022，19（21）：83-86.
[21] 刘太福，黄涛，杨延兵，等.后外侧入路联合后内侧入路治疗KlammerⅡ、Ⅲ型后侧Pilon骨折的疗效[J].实用医院临床杂志，2020，17（5）：56-59.
[22] 孙少美，关亚奇，潘金龙，等.前内-后外侧双切口入路与前外侧单切口入路治疗Pilon骨折合并腓骨骨折的疗效比较[J].海南医学，2021，32（6）：731-734.
[23] 姚鹏飞，王昊，任戈亮，等.改良后内侧切口联合前外侧切口内固定治疗Klammer Ⅱ、Ⅲ型后Pilon骨折[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2021，36（2）：196-198.
[24] 赖志斌，朱永展，邹运璇，等.改良后内侧经踇长屈肌外侧入路治疗后Pilon骨折[J].中华医学杂志，2021，101（15）：1077-1082.
[25] 唐润，杨杰，李毅，等.改良内侧入路治疗内侧柱压缩性Pilon骨折[J].中国骨伤，2022，35（3）：248-252.
[26] 姚鹏飞，李强，董斌，等. 改良后内侧入路在治疗三踝骨折中的临床应用[J]. 创伤外科杂志，2020，22（1）：56-58.
[27] 刘波，乔之军，曹光华，等.后内侧胫后肌腱前方入路联合后外侧入路切开复位内固定治疗Klammer Ⅱ/Ⅲ型后pilon样骨折[J].中华创伤杂志，2021，37（12）：1099- 1104.
[28] 张钦明，吴彬，褚风龙，等.两种入路开放复位内固定治疗后Pilon骨折[J].中国矫形外科杂志，2020，28（18）：1666- 1669.