Objective To assess the effectiveness of the new anterolateral approach of the distal femur for the treatment of distal femoral fractures. Methods Between July 2007 and December 2009, 58 patients with distal femoral fractures were treated by new anterolateral approach of the distal femur in 28 patients (new approach group) and by conventional approach in 30 patients (conventional approach group). There was no significant difference in gender, age, cause of injury, affected side, type of fracture, disease duration, complication, or preoperative intervention (P gt; 0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative fluoroscopy frequency, hospitalization days, and Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score of knee were recorded. Results Operation was successfully completed in all patients of 2 groups, and healing of incision by first intention was obtained; no vascular and nerves injuries occurred. The operation time and intraoperative fluoroscopy frequency of new approach group were significantly less than those of conventional approach group (P lt; 0.05). But the intraoperative blood loss and the hospitalization days showed no significant difference between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). All patients were followed up 12-36 months (mean, 19.8 months). Bone union was shown on X-ray films; the fracture healing time was (12.62 ± 2.34) weeks in the new approach group and was (13.78 ± 1.94) weeks in the conventional approach group, showing no significant difference (t=2.78, P=0.10). The knee HSS score at last follow-up was 94.4 ± 4.2 in the new approach group, and was 89.2 ± 6.0 in the conventional approach group, showing significant difference between 2 groups (t=3.85, P=0.00). Conclusion New anterolateral approach of the distal femur for distal femoral fractures has the advantages of exposure plenitude, minimal tissue trauma, and early function rehabilitation training so as to enhance the function recovery of knee joint.
ObjectiveTo study the effectiveness of a new anterolateral approach of distal femur in the treatment of type C distal femoral fractures by comparing with traditional lateral and anterolateral approaches. MethodsThe clinical data of 51 patients with type C distal femoral fractures treated between January 2008 and August 2011 were retrospectively analyzed. Of 51 patients, 24 patients received the new anterolateral approach of distal femur combined with fixation of condylar buttress plate (modified group), and 27 patients underwent traditional lateral or anterolateral approach combined with fixation of condylar buttress plate (traditional group). There was no significant difference in gender, age, injury cause, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) classification, side, fracture type, complication, and the time from injury to operation between 2 groups (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, frequency of intraoperative fluoroscopy, hospitalization time, fracture healing time, and Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) scores of the knee at 3, 6, and 12 months were recorded. ResultsThe operation was successfully completed and the incision healed by first intention in all patients. The operation time and frequency of intraoperative fluoroscopy of modified group were significantly less than those of traditional group (P<0.05). But the intraoperative blood loss and the hospitalization time showed no significant difference between 2 groups (P>0.05). All patients were followed up 12-37 months (mean, 21.3 months). X-ray films showed all fractures were union. The fracture healing time was (12.92±2.24) weeks in the modified group and (13.24±2.52) weeks in the traditional group, showing no significant difference (t=0.476, P=0.637). The knee HSS scores of modified group were significantly higher than those of traditional group at 3, 6, and 12 months after operation (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of knee varus or valgus, leg length discrepancy, internal fixator loosening, flexing dysfunction of knee, traumatic arthritis of knee, and total complications between 2 groups (P>0.05). ConclusionComparing with traditional lateral and anterolateral approaches, using the new anterolateral approach to treat type C distal femoral fractures has the advantages of less damage to soft tissue, excellent exposure, less operation time, and frequency of intraoperative fluoroscopy, and better postoperative rehabilitation of knee joint.
Objective To investigate the feasibility of anterolateral approach for L5 vertebral resection, bone grafting, and screw rod fixation by imaging and biomechanics researches. Methods Twenty formalized adult cadavers (12 males and 8 females) were randomly divided into 2 groups; L5 vertebral resection, bone graft, and screw rod fixation was performed on 10 specimens by using anterolateral approach (experimental group), and on the other 10 specimens by combined anterior and posterior approach. CT scanning and three-dimensional reconstruction were performed in the experimental group; preoperative maximal safe entry angle and depth of screws and intraoperative actual entry angle and depth of screws were measured; the sacral screw position was observed after operation. The biomechanical test was done in 2 groups. Results Twenty specimens smoothly underwent L5 excision and reconstruction. CT scan showed that there was no significant difference in maximal safe entry angle and depth of screws between males and females in experimental group before operation (P>0.05); the maximal safe entry angle and depth were 51.93° and 47.88 mm for anterior screw, and were 37.04° and 46.28 mm for posterior screw. After operation, depth of the sacral anterior and posterior screws were appropriate, which did not pierce into the spinal canal. The biomechanical test results indicated that the flexion, extension, and lateral flexion displacements, and vertical compression stiffness showed no significant difference between 2 groups (P>0.05). Conclusion For L5 lesions not invading posterior column, to use L5 vertebral resection, bone graft, and screw rod fixation by anterolateral approach is a safe and feasible method to reconstruct lumbosacral stability, with the advantages of no changing posture, less operation time and incision, and prevention of bone graft shift, but effectiveness need further be identified.