目的探讨闭合复位经皮空心螺钉内固定治疗隐匿型Lisfranc损伤的临床效果。方法北京市顺义区医院于2017年1月至2022年1月收治隐匿型Lisfranc损伤患者35例,男22例、女13例,所有患者均采用C型臂透视下闭合复位、复位钳加压。采用美国足踝...目的探讨闭合复位经皮空心螺钉内固定治疗隐匿型Lisfranc损伤的临床效果。方法北京市顺义区医院于2017年1月至2022年1月收治隐匿型Lisfranc损伤患者35例,男22例、女13例,所有患者均采用C型臂透视下闭合复位、复位钳加压。采用美国足踝外科协会(American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society,AOFAS)中足评分、患者简明健康量表(the MOS item short from health survey,SF-36)评分和视觉模拟评分法(visual analogue scale,VAS)评分评估临床效果,随访观察临床结果和并发症发生情况。结果术后所有患者的切口均一期愈合,无感染和皮肤坏死等切口并发症,无血管和神经损伤。随访时间3~36个月,平均(22.5±4.8)个月;骨折愈合时间8~12周,平均(6.5±0.3)周。末次随访AOFAS中足评分为(80.1±6.1)分,VAS评分为(2.2±0.3)分,SF-36的生理评分为(81.4±6.7)分,SF-36的躯体疼痛评分为(84.5±7.6)分。末次随访时,3例出现空心螺钉松动,均无症状,未出现断钉现象;2例出现轻度关节退变,无症状,未做处理。足部功能根据AOFAS评分标准评定:优22例,良7例,可6例,优良率为82.86%。结论闭合复位经皮空心螺钉内固定治疗隐匿型Lisfranc损伤的效果显著。展开更多
Lisfranc injuries can be difficult injuries to identify and treat, while also being the subject of significant debate on proper surgical management. A narrative literature review was performed using Pubmed and Google ...Lisfranc injuries can be difficult injuries to identify and treat, while also being the subject of significant debate on proper surgical management. A narrative literature review was performed using Pubmed and Google Scholar databases to identify recent studies evaluating open reduction internal fixation vs primary arthrodesis for Lisfranc injuries to further elucidate optimal surgical management. Additional focus was placed removal of hardware after ORIF to identify the need for routine hardware removal as an additional surgery may guide surgeon decision-making. This review showed inconclusive data on the superiority of ORIF vs arthrodesis, as multiple conflicting results exist, though established that functional results are similar between these options. Though both are generally accepted treatment options, there are no well-designed randomized controlled trials directly comparing the two. Retention of hardware after ORIF has been shown to be tolerated, though there is a significant risk of the need for unplanned removal due to pain and hardware breakage.展开更多
文摘目的探讨闭合复位经皮空心螺钉内固定治疗隐匿型Lisfranc损伤的临床效果。方法北京市顺义区医院于2017年1月至2022年1月收治隐匿型Lisfranc损伤患者35例,男22例、女13例,所有患者均采用C型臂透视下闭合复位、复位钳加压。采用美国足踝外科协会(American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society,AOFAS)中足评分、患者简明健康量表(the MOS item short from health survey,SF-36)评分和视觉模拟评分法(visual analogue scale,VAS)评分评估临床效果,随访观察临床结果和并发症发生情况。结果术后所有患者的切口均一期愈合,无感染和皮肤坏死等切口并发症,无血管和神经损伤。随访时间3~36个月,平均(22.5±4.8)个月;骨折愈合时间8~12周,平均(6.5±0.3)周。末次随访AOFAS中足评分为(80.1±6.1)分,VAS评分为(2.2±0.3)分,SF-36的生理评分为(81.4±6.7)分,SF-36的躯体疼痛评分为(84.5±7.6)分。末次随访时,3例出现空心螺钉松动,均无症状,未出现断钉现象;2例出现轻度关节退变,无症状,未做处理。足部功能根据AOFAS评分标准评定:优22例,良7例,可6例,优良率为82.86%。结论闭合复位经皮空心螺钉内固定治疗隐匿型Lisfranc损伤的效果显著。
文摘Lisfranc injuries can be difficult injuries to identify and treat, while also being the subject of significant debate on proper surgical management. A narrative literature review was performed using Pubmed and Google Scholar databases to identify recent studies evaluating open reduction internal fixation vs primary arthrodesis for Lisfranc injuries to further elucidate optimal surgical management. Additional focus was placed removal of hardware after ORIF to identify the need for routine hardware removal as an additional surgery may guide surgeon decision-making. This review showed inconclusive data on the superiority of ORIF vs arthrodesis, as multiple conflicting results exist, though established that functional results are similar between these options. Though both are generally accepted treatment options, there are no well-designed randomized controlled trials directly comparing the two. Retention of hardware after ORIF has been shown to be tolerated, though there is a significant risk of the need for unplanned removal due to pain and hardware breakage.
