Objective To compare the effectiveness between minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for treatment of extra-articular distal tibial fracture. Methods Between March 2009 and March 2012, 57 patients with extra-articular distal tibial fractures were treated, and the clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. Of 57 cases, 31 were treated with MIPO (MIPO group), and 26 with ORIF (ORIF group). There was no significant difference in gender, age, cause of injury, type of fractures, complication, and time from injury to operation between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, fracture healing time, and complications were compared between 2 groups. Results There was no significant difference in operation time and intraoperative blood loss between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). Wound infection occurred in 5 cases [2 in MIPO group (6.5%) and 3 in ORIF group (11.5%)], showing no significant difference (χ2=0.651, P=0.499). The other wound obtained healing by first intention. All cases were followed up 13-24 months (mean, 15 months). No significant difference was found in the average healing time between 2 groups and between patients with types A and B by AO classification (P gt; 0.05); in patients with type C, the healing time in MIPO group was significantly shorter than that in ORIF group (t= — 2.277, P=0.033). Delayed union was observed in 3 cases of MIPO group (9.7%) and in 4 cases of ORIF group (15.4%), showing no significant difference (χ2=0.428, P=0.691). Mal-union occurred in 4 cases of MIPO group (12.9%) and in 1 case of ORIF group (3.8%), showing no significant difference (χ2=1.449, P=0.362). No significant difference was found in Mazur score between 2 groups (t=0.480, P=0.633). The excellent and good rate was 93.5% in MIPO group (excellent in 24 cases, good in 5 cases, fair in 1 case, and poor in 1 case) and was 92.3% in ORIF group (excellent in 18 cases, good in 6 cases, and poor in 2 cases), and the difference was not significant (Z= — 0.687, P=0.492). Conclusion Both MIPO and ORIF have good results in treating extra-articular distal tibial fractures. MIPO is superior to ORIF for treating complex and communited fractures.
Objective To explore the relative prognostic factors of Tile C pelvic injury after iliolumbar fixation. Methods Between March 2007 and March 2010, 60 patients with Tile C pelvic injuries were surgically treated with iliolumbar fixation, including 39 males and 21 females with an average age of 37 years (range, 17-66 years). Of them, 27 cases were classified as Tile C1, 20 as Tile C2, and 13 as Tile C3. The preoperative injury severity score (ISS) was 12-66 (mean, 29.4). The time from injury to surgery was 2-25 days (mean, 8.1 days). Iliolumbar fixation was performed in all patients. Unconditional logistic analysis was used to analyze the relationship between the age, sex, body mass index (BMI), operation opportunity, the preoperative combined injury, classification of fracture, the postoperative complication, reduction outcome, sacral nerve injury, and the time of physical exercise and the prognosis. Results All 60 patients were followed up 12-56 months (mean, 27.3 months). Infection of incisions occurred in 12 cases and were cured after dressing change; healing of incision by first intention was obtained in the other patients. Delay sacral nerve injury was found in 15 patients, 6 patients underwent nerve decompression, and 9 underwent conservative treatment. Ten patients had nail protrusion of Schanz screws at the posterior superior illac spine, and 3 patients had pain, which was relieved after removal of the internal fixator. One patient had bone-grafting nonunion of sacroiliac joint, which was improved by pressured bone graft. Five patients had the beam breakage without significant effect. Six patients had deep vein thrombosis, among them 4 underwent filter and 2 underwent nonsurgical treatment. The healing time of fracture was 3-6 months (mean, 3.9 months). According to the Matta function score, the results were excellent in 31 cases, good in 24 cases, fair in 3 cases, and poor in 2 cases with an excellent and good rate of 91.7% at last follow-up. Majeed score was 58-100 (mean, 86), 28 were rated as excellent, 12 as good, 16 as fair, and 4 as poor with an excellent and good rate of 66.7%. The logistic analysis showed that the age, sex, BMI, and postoperative complications were not prognostic factors; early operation (within 10 days), early function exercises (within 7 days), the better reduction quality, and the less sacral nerve injury were in favor of prognosis; and the worse preoperative combined injury and pelvic injury were, the worse the prognosis was. Conclusion Operation opportunity, the preoperative combined injury, reduction outcome, sacral nerve injury, and the time of physical exercise are all significantly prognostic factors of Tile C pelvic injuries
【Abstract】 Objective To explore the midterm efficacy of superelastic cage implantation for the treatment of osteonecrosisof femoral head (ONFH). Methods From July 1996 to January 1998, 54 patients (75 hips) of ONFH were treatedwith superelastic cage and followed up. Among 54 patients, 5 patients were lost to follow up and 3 patients were dead of myocardialinfarction, renal failure and gastric cancer, respectively. Forty-six patients completed follow up including 32 males and14 females, aged from 21 to 61 with an average of 39 years old. Twenty-nine hips were classified as Ficat Stage Ⅱ and 36 as StageⅢ . Harris score was 58.20 ± 13.82. All patients were evaluated both cl inically and radiographically. Results Postoperatively,forty-six patients (65 hips) were followed up for 86 to 125 months with an average of 8 years and 8 months. Harris score was 80.78 ± 18.77. Twenty-nine hips were rated excellent, 21 good, 2 fair and 13 poor．A total of 76.9% of overall cl inical results were rated as good or excellent. Eight hips (12.3%) with the cage broken were turned to total hip replacement. Radiographicevaluation: 16 hips (24.6%) rated as grade Ⅰ , 34 (52.3%) grade Ⅱ and 15 (23.1%) grade Ⅲ . Conclusion Superelastic cage implantation is one of alternative treatments for ONFH at early and midterm stages. However, long-term follow-up is needed to know whether it is able to cure ONFH and whether cages will be broken as time passes by.