Taylor空间支架治疗胫腓骨中下段骨折疗效观察

The assessment of the application of Taylor spatial frame in treatment of intermediate or distal tibiofibula fractures

目的探讨应用Taylor空间支架治疗胫腓骨中下段骨折的临床疗效和安全性。方法回顾分析2015年1月—2017年1月收治的74例胫腓骨中下段骨折患者临床资料,根据骨折固定方法不同分为内固定组(26例)和外固定组(48例)。两组患者年龄、性别、致伤原因、骨折类型、受伤至手术时间等一般资料比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),具有可比性。记录并比较两组患者术中出血量、骨折愈合时间、固定物去除时间及并发症发生情况;采用Johner-Wruhs胫骨干骨折治疗最终效果评价标准评定患肢功能;采用罗从风等的标准评定术后下肢力线恢复情况。结果两组患者均获随访,随访时间6~22个月,中位时间14个月。患者骨折均获愈合,内固定组术中出血量、骨折愈合时间及固定物去除时间均显著高于外固定组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后内固定组发生钢板外露1例、骨折延迟愈合1例、钢板断裂1例;外固定组发生骨折延迟愈合2例、软组织缺损4例;两组并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.015,P=0.904)。术后10个月参照Johner-Wruhs标准评定患肢功能,内固定组优19例,良5例,可2例,优良率92.3%;外固定组优42例,良3例,可2例,优良率95.7%;两组优良率比较差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.392,P=0.531)。术后4个月采用罗从风等的标准评定术后下肢力线恢复情况,内固定组优24例,可1例,差1例,优良率92.3%;外固定组优46例,可1例,差1例,优良率95.8%;两组优良率比较差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.520,P=0.471)。结论采用Taylor空间支架治疗胫腓骨中下段骨折相较于采用钢板内固定治疗愈合时间短,并发症少,可减少骨折治疗周期,有利于患者骨折愈合及肢体功能恢复,相对安全可靠。

Objective To determine the effectiveness and the safety of the Taylor spatial frame in treatment of intermediate or distal tibiofibula fractures. Methods The clinical data of 74 patients with intermediate or distal tibiofibular fractures treated between January 2015 and January 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. According to fixation methods, they were divided into internal fixation group（26 cases） and external fixation group（48 cases）. There was no significant difference in the age, gender, cause of injury, type of fracture, time from injury to operation between2 groups（P0.05）. The intraoperative blood loss, fracture healing time, fixator removal time, and complications were recorded and compared. The final function evaluation criteria of Johner-Wruhs humeral shaft fracture were used to evaluate the function of the affected limb. The lower limb force line recovery after operation was evaluated according to the standard evaluation of LUO Congfeng et al. Results Both groups were followed up 6-22 months（median,14 months）. All patients obtained the fracture healing. The intraoperative blood loss, fracture healing time, and fixator removal time were significantly higher in the internal fixation group than those in the external fixation group（P0.05）.There were 1 case of plate exposure, 1 case of delayed fracture healing, and 1 case of plate fracture in the internal fixation group; and there were 2 cases of delayed fracture healing and 4 cases of soft tissue defect in the external fixation group; no significant difference was found in the incidence of complications between 2 groups（χ2=0.015, P=0.904）. The function of the affected limb was evaluated by Johner-Wruhs standard at 10 months after operation, the results was excellent in19 cases, good in 5 cases, and fair in 2 cases in the internal fixation group, with an excellent and good rate of 92.3%; the results was excellent in 42 cases, good in 3 cases, and fair in 2 cases in the external fixation group, with an excellent and good rate of 95.7%; showing no significant difference between 2 groups（χ2=0.392, P=0.531）. The lower limb force line recovery after operation was evaluated according to the standard evaluation of LUO Congfeng et al. at 4 months after operation, the results was excellent in 24 cases, fair in 1 case, poor in 1 case in the internal fixation group, with an excellent and good rate of 92.3%; the results was excellent in 46 cases, fair in 1 case, poor in 1 case in the external fixation group,with an excellent and good rate of 95.8%; showing no significant difference between 2 groups（χ2=0.520, P=0.471）.Conclusion The use of Taylor spatial frame in the treatment of the intermediate or distal tibiofibular fractures can obviously reduce the healing time and complications than the internal fixation of the plate. It can reduce the fracture treatment cycle and is beneficial to the fracture healing and limb function recovery, which is relatively safe and reliable.