留言板

尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

2种不同手术方法治疗陈旧性踝关节骨折合并下胫腓联合损伤的对比

刘路平 朱兰然 张卫 陈磊杰 王超然 廖经武

刘路平, 朱兰然, 张卫, 陈磊杰, 王超然, 廖经武. 2种不同手术方法治疗陈旧性踝关节骨折合并下胫腓联合损伤的对比[J]. 昆明医科大学学报, 2021, 42(10): 106-111. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20211017
引用本文: 刘路平, 朱兰然, 张卫, 陈磊杰, 王超然, 廖经武. 2种不同手术方法治疗陈旧性踝关节骨折合并下胫腓联合损伤的对比[J]. 昆明医科大学学报, 2021, 42(10): 106-111. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20211017
Lu-ping LIU, Lan-ran ZHU, Wei ZHANG, Lei-jie CHEN, Chao-ran WANG, Jing-wu LIAO. Comparison of Two Surgical Managements for the Delayed Ankles Fracture Combined with Distal Tibiofibular Syndesmosis Injuries[J]. Journal of Kunming Medical University, 2021, 42(10): 106-111. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20211017
Citation: Lu-ping LIU, Lan-ran ZHU, Wei ZHANG, Lei-jie CHEN, Chao-ran WANG, Jing-wu LIAO. Comparison of Two Surgical Managements for the Delayed Ankles Fracture Combined with Distal Tibiofibular Syndesmosis Injuries[J]. Journal of Kunming Medical University, 2021, 42(10): 106-111. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20211017

2种不同手术方法治疗陈旧性踝关节骨折合并下胫腓联合损伤的对比

doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20211017
基金项目: 云南省教育厅-昆明医科大学应用基础研究联合专项基金资助项目[202001AY070001(-066)]
详细信息
    作者简介:

    刘路平(1977~),男,云南大理人,硕士,讲师,主要从事骨科临床工作

    通讯作者:

    廖经武,E-mail:liaojingwu@163.com

  • 中图分类号: R683

Comparison of Two Surgical Managements for the Delayed Ankles Fracture Combined with Distal Tibiofibular Syndesmosis Injuries

  • 摘要:   目的  探讨陈旧性踝关节骨折合并下胫腓联合韧带损伤(ankles fracture combined with distal tibiofibular syndesmosis injuries,AFTSI)的手术治疗效果。  方法  回顾性分析38例陈旧性AFTSI手术疗效,患者受伤至手术时间28~196 d,平均53 d。其中切开复位内固定 + 下胫腓联合Tighttrope袢钢板弹性固定18例(A组,n = 18),切开复位内固定 + 下胫腓联合螺钉固定20例(B组,n = 20),术后美国足踝外科学会评分、手术前后下胫腓间隙及下胫腓重叠阴影差值,平均住院时间,手术时间,术中失血量,术后开始完全负重时间用于评价疗效。所有患者均接受平均18个月随访,下胫腓联合螺钉于术后2~3月取出。  结果  所有患者均未出现切口感染、骨性关节炎、内固定断裂及踝穴增宽情况;术后AOFAS评分A组高于B组,术后开始完全负重时间A组早于B组(P < 0. 05);平均手术时间,术中失血量,平均住院时间,手术前后下胫腓重叠阴影差值及下胫腓间隙差值2组差异无统计学意义(P > 0. 05)。  结论  陈旧性AFTSI使用Tightrope袢钢板弹性固定患者可以早期负重,较传统的螺钉内固定具有更好的疗效。
  • 图  1  下胫腓损伤测量

    Figure  1.  Measurement of injury of lower tibiofibular

    图  2  右踝陈旧性双踝骨折伴下胫腓损伤

    患者男,46岁,受伤时间87 d,行切开复位内固定及下胫腓Tighttrope袢钢板固定。A:术前片;B:术后片;C,D:术后外观。

    Figure  2.  ORIF+Tightrope fixation for syndesmosis injuries

    图  3  右踝陈旧性双踝骨折伴下胫腓损伤

    患者男,51岁,受伤时间46 d,外院转入,行切开复位内固定及下胫腓螺钉固定。A:术前片;B:术后片;C,D:术后外观。

    Figure  3.  ORIF+screw fixation of syndesmosis injuries

    表  1  患者一般资料($\bar x \pm s $

    Table  1.   General information of patients ($\bar x \pm s $

    组别A组(下胫腓弹性固定,n = 18)B组(下胫腓螺钉固定,n = 20)P
    病例数(n 18 20 -
    性别(男/女,n 14/4 16/4 0.867
    年龄(岁) 41.78 ± 13.65 39.5 ± 12.04 0.588
    损伤至手术时间(d) 48.56 ± 33.78 57.1 ± 38.49 0.474
    受伤机制(高坠/车祸/扭伤)(n 6/5/7 7/4/9 0.846
    Lauge-Hansen分型[10](旋后外旋/旋后内收型/
    旋前外旋型/旋前外展型/垂直跖屈型)(n
    7/4/4/2/1 9/5/3/2/1 0.982
    骨折解剖分型(双踝/三踝)(n 10/8 14/6 0.357
      一般资料中年龄及损伤至手术时间2组比较采用独立样本t检验,其余指标卡方检验,显著水平设定成0.05。
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  2  AOFAS评分,术后完全负重、平均手术、住院时间,术中失血量,手术前后下胫腓-重叠阴影差值及间隙差值比较

    Table  2.   Comparison of AOFAS score,complete weight-bearing and average operative time,intraoperative blood loss,hospital stay,difference of pre- and post-operative tibiofibular clear space and overlap

    项目A组B组PF
    例数 18 20
    术后AOFAS评分 81.11 ± 8.49# 73.65 ± 12.68 < 0.05 3.52
    开始完全负重时间(周) 8.44 ± 2.15# 11 ± 1.5 < 0.05 0.16
    平均手术时间(h) 3.06 ± 0.75 3.23 ± 0.62 > 0.05 0.84
    术中失血量(mL) 323.17 ± 49.62 347.7 ± 62.59 > 0.05 3.91
    平均住院时间(d) 15.61 ± 2.43 16.55 ± 3.55 > 0.05 1.15
    手术前后下胫腓重叠阴影差值(mm) 2.6 ± 0.49 2.49 ± 0.68 > 0.05 1.73
    手术前后下胫腓间隙差值(mm) 2.84 ± 0.582 3.01 ± 0.74 > 0.05 2.17
      与B组比较,#P < 0.05。
    下载: 导出CSV
  • [1] Han S M,Wu T H,Wen J X,et al. Radiographic analysis of adult ankle fractures using combined danis-weber and lauge-hansen classification systems[J]. Scientific Reports,2020,10(1):7655. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-64479-2
    [2] Baumbach S F,Braunstein M,Herterich V,et al. Arthroscopic repair of chronic lateral ankle instability[J]. Operative Orthopadie und Traumatologie,2019,31(3):201-210. doi: 10.1007/s00064-019-0595-7
    [3] Cammas C,Ancion A,Detrembleur C,et al. Frequency and risk factors of complications after surgical treatment of ankle fractures:a retrospective study of 433 patients[J]. Acta Orthopaedica Belgica,2020,86(3):563-574.
    [4] Hamam A W,Chohan M B Y,Tieszer C,et al. Anatomic repair vs closed reduction of the syndesmosis[J]. Foot & Ankle International,2021,107(11):72.
    [5] Mandel J,Behery O,Narayanan R,et al. Single- vs 2-screw lag fixation of the medial malleolus in unstable ankle fractures[J]. Foot & Ankle International,2019,40(7):790-796.
    [6] Wu K,Lin J,Huang J,et al. Evaluation of transsyndesmotic fixation and primary deltoid ligament repair in ankle fractures with suspected combined deltoid ligament injury[J]. Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery,2018,57(4):694-700.
    [7] Lee D O,Yoo J H,Choi W Y. Optimal screw fixation of syndesmosis using a targeting drill guide:a technical note[J]. The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery,2020,59(1):206-209. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2019.05.005
    [8] Song L,Liao Z,Kuang Z,et al. Comparison of tendon suture fixation and cortical screw fixation for treatment of distal tibiofibular syndesmosis injury:A case-control study[J]. Medicine,2020,99(34):e21573. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000021573
    [9] Rder B W,Figved W,Madsen J E,et al. Better outcome for suture button compared with single syndesmotic screw for syndesmosis injury:five-year results of a randomized controlled trial[J]. Bone and Joint Journal,2020,102-B(2):212-219. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.102B2.BJJ-2019-0692.R2
    [10] Shariff S S,Nathwani D K. Lauge-hansen classification-A literature review[J]. Injury-international Journal of the Care of the Injured,2006,37(9):888-890. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2006.05.013
    [11] Hermans J J,Wentink N,Beumer A,et al. Correlation between radiological assessment of acute ankle fractures and syndesmotic injury on MRI[J]. Skeletal Radiology,2012,41(7):787-801. doi: 10.1007/s00256-011-1284-2
    [12] 苏琰,李振东,薛剑锋,等. 经腓骨截骨复位内固定治疗中老年累及后踝陈旧性踝关节骨折[J]. 中华创伤杂志,2020,36(4):315-320.
    [13] Blom R P,Meijer D T,de Muinck Keizer R J O,et al. Posterior malleolar fracture morphology determines outcome in rotational type ankle fractures[J]. Injury,2019,50(7):1392-1397. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.06.003
    [14] Grambart S T,Prusa R D,Ternent K M. Revision of the Chronic Syndesmotic Injury[J]. Clinics in Podiatric Medicine and Surgery,2020,37(3):577-592. doi: 10.1016/j.cpm.2020.03.011
    [15] Ju D G,Debbi E M,Neustein A Z,et al. Fibular lengthening osteotomy with revision syndesmotic repair for ankle fracture malunion[J]. Journal of orthopaedic trauma,2019,33(Suppl1):S38-S39.
    [16] Lemmers D H L,Lubberts B,Stavenuiter R,et al. Factors associated with adverse events after distal tibiofibular syndesmosis fixation[J]. Injury,2020,51(2):542-547. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.12.011
    [17] Mosca M,Buda R,Ceccarelli F,et al. ,Vocale E,Massimi S,Benedetti MG,Grassi A,Caravelli S,Zaffagnini S. Ankle joint re-balancing in the management of ankle fracture malunion using fibular lengthening:prospective clinical-radiological results at mid-term follow-up[J]. International Orthopaedics,2021,45(2):411-417. doi: 10.1007/s00264-020-04690-y
    [18] Burton C A,Arthur R J,Rivera M J,et al. The Examination of Repeated Self-Mobilizations With Movement and Joint Mobilizations on Individuals With Chronic Ankle Instability[J]. Journal of Sport Rehabilitation,2020,30(3):458-466.
    [19] Kapadia B H,Sabarese M J,Chatterjee D,et al. Evaluating success rate and comparing complications of operative techniques used to treat chronic syndesmosis injuries[J]. Journal of Orthopaedics,2020,22:225-230. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2020.04.011
    [20] Sanders D,Schneider P,Taylor M,et al. Improved reduction of the tibio-fibular syndesmosis with tightrope compared to screw fixation:results of a randomized controlled study[J]. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma,2019,33(11):531-537. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001559
    [21] McKenzie A C,Hesselholt K E,Larsen M S,et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis on treatment of ankle fractures with syndesmotic rupture:suture-button fixation versus cortical screw fixation[J]. The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery,2019,58(5):946-953. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2018.12.006
  • [1] 张莉, 薛林佳, 岳梨蓉, 陈涌, 丁昱, 张环宇.  MDT诊疗模式在颞下颌关节盘不可复性盘前移位中的治疗效果, 昆明医科大学学报. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20220409
    [2] 杨少华, 陈轶晖, 洪茂林, 胡晟, 张小文.  良性胆肠吻合口狭窄球囊扩张与再手术治疗的疗效比较, 昆明医科大学学报. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20210135
    [3] 张辅君, 龚容.  动态监测食管癌患者手术及化疗前后T淋巴细胞亚群及NK细胞水平变化的意义, 昆明医科大学学报. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20210935
    [4] 胡兴喜, 段浩, 钟宗雨, 何飞.  Endobutton钢板与单枚下胫腓螺钉在急性下胫腓联合损伤中的疗效比较, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [5] 宋仕刚, 吴迪, 白平.  低位腹主动脉球囊临时阻断在复杂髋臼骨折手术中的应用, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [6] 陆秋安, 杜开利, 张春强, 郭培宇, 孙宇鹏, 何少波.  透视辅助下病灶有限清除植骨融合内固定术治疗胸椎结核, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [7] 朱天波.  宫颈癌术前新辅助化疗的临床应用, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [8] 袁瑞红.  面颈部色素痣不同手术切口疗效比较, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [9] 刘雪峰.  四肢骨肉瘤手术治疗方式选择与预后, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [10] 蔡碧波.  肛窦炎178例治疗分析, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [11] 杨永华.  大脑中动脉瘤破裂出血手术临床治疗15例分析, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [12] 杨定勇.  胸腔镜辅助小切口治疗外伤性血气胸的临床疗效分析, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [13] 李建明.  197例老年胆结石患者的治疗效果观察, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [14] 高瞻.  先天性心脏病合并重度肺动脉高压外科手术治疗体会, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [15] 彭旭光.  右前纵隔巨大胸腺瘤合并纯红再障1 例报道, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [16] 施承民.  腹腔镜结直肠癌手术74例临床分析, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [17] 胡加绍.  胫骨平台双髁骨折42例治疗分析, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [18] 经导管动脉栓塞联合外科手术治疗肝血管瘤40例临床分析, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [19] 腹主动脉瘤的外科治疗进展, 昆明医科大学学报.
    [20] 吴光明.  AVM破裂出血手术疗效的影响因素分析, 昆明医科大学学报.
  • 加载中
图(3) / 表(2)
计量
  • 文章访问数:  3074
  • HTML全文浏览量:  1842
  • PDF下载量:  12
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2021-07-18
  • 网络出版日期:  2021-10-29
  • 刊出日期:  2021-10-30

目录

    /

    返回文章
    返回