切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华肩肘外科电子杂志 ›› 2020, Vol. 08 ›› Issue (03) : 220 -225. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5790.2020.03.006

所属专题: 文献

论著

Nice结辅助复位技术与传统复位技术在移位粉碎性锁骨中段骨折中的应用比较
陈健1, 马剑雄2, 马信龙2,(), 赵磊1, 万烽磊1, 张庆1, 汪胜1, 左才红1, 黄照国1, 张财义1   
  1. 1. 242000 宣城市人民医院骨科
    2. 300050 天津医院骨科
  • 收稿日期:2020-05-15 出版日期:2020-08-05
  • 通信作者: 马信龙
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金(11772226); 国家自然科学基金(81572154); 中国博士后科学基金面上资助(2017M621087)

Comparison of the Nice knot assisted reduction technique and the traditional reduction technique in the treatment of displaced comminuted midshaft clavicle fracture

Jian Chen1, Jianxiong Ma2, Xinlong Ma2,(), Lei Zhao1, Fenglei Wan1, Qing Zhang1, Sheng Wang1, Caihong Zuo1, Zhaoguo Huang1, Caiyi Zhang1   

  1. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, People’s Hospital of Xuancheng City, Xuancheng 242000, China
    2. Department of Orthopaedics, Tianjin Hospital, Tianjin 300050, China
  • Received:2020-05-15 Published:2020-08-05
  • Corresponding author: Xinlong Ma
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Ma Xinlong, Email:
引用本文:

陈健, 马剑雄, 马信龙, 赵磊, 万烽磊, 张庆, 汪胜, 左才红, 黄照国, 张财义. Nice结辅助复位技术与传统复位技术在移位粉碎性锁骨中段骨折中的应用比较[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2020, 08(03): 220-225.

Jian Chen, Jianxiong Ma, Xinlong Ma, Lei Zhao, Fenglei Wan, Qing Zhang, Sheng Wang, Caihong Zuo, Zhaoguo Huang, Caiyi Zhang. Comparison of the Nice knot assisted reduction technique and the traditional reduction technique in the treatment of displaced comminuted midshaft clavicle fracture[J]. Chinese Journal of Shoulder and Elbow(Electronic Edition), 2020, 08(03): 220-225.

目的

比较Nice结辅助复位技术(Nice结固定蝶形骨块)与传统复位技术(螺钉固定蝶形骨块)在成人移位粉碎性锁骨中段骨折(AO分型15-B2型)中的应用,为临床围手术期的处理提供参考。

方法

回顾性分析2017年1月至2019年6月本科收治且获得完整随访的47例成人锁骨中段粉碎性骨折(AO分型15-B2型)患者资料,其中Nice结辅助复位技术组22例,传统复位技术组25例。分析比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后第2天视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale,VAS)、骨折愈合时间、术后内固定并发症和末次随访肩关节Neer评分。内固定并发症包括:感染、内固定松动、断裂和骨块移位。

结果

47例患者术后获6 ~ 15个月随访,平均(10.7±3.5)个月。Nice结辅助复位技术组手术时间50 ~ 80 min,平均(66.45 ± 7.24) min;术中出血量18 ~ 40 ml,平均(29.73 ± 5.63) ml;术后第2天VAS评分1 ~ 5分,平均(2.95 ± 1.21)分;骨折愈合时间11 ~ 18周,平均(13.91 ± 1.74)周;末次随访肩关节Neer评分90 ~ 100分,平均(94.55 ± 3.00)分。传统复位技术组手术时间55 ~ 91 min,平均(73.24 ± 10.97) min;术中出血量20 ~ 50 ml,平均(35.44 ± 8.52) ml;术后第2天VAS评分1 ~ 6分,平均(2.88 ± 1.36)分;骨折愈合时间12 ~ 18周,平均(14.08 ± 1.78)周;末次随访肩关节Neer评分90 ~ 100分,平均(94.28 ± 2.75)分。两组相比,Nice结辅助复位技术组手术时间短、术中出血量少(P< 0.05),而在其他评价指标,两组之间差异均无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。两组患者术口均一期愈合,无内固定松动或断裂并发症发生,无骨折块移位。

结论

Nice结辅助复位技术在移位粉碎性锁骨中段骨折中应用,缩短了手术时间,减少术中出血量,术后结果满意,但还需要进一步多中心、前瞻性临床随机对照研究来证实、推广。

Background

Clavicular fractures are one of the most common injuries in adults, accounting for 2% to 5% of all fractures, and the incidence is twice as high in young men as in women, possibly because they are at significant risk of trauma. Treatment of clavicular fractures should be guided by the fracture location (middle 1/3, lateral or medial) and the fracture morphology (undisplaced, displaced or comminuted) . Current guidelines recommend surgical treatment for clavicular fractures of fully displaced, 2 cm of shortened or comminuted in the middle 1/3 third, as these may help to restore shoulder motion earlier and improve eventual shoulder function. In 2019, Guerra, et al. conducted a meta-analysis including 14 randomized controlled trials and 1 546 patients. They found that compared with nonoperative treatment, surgical treatment could remarkably reduce the rate of nonunion and shorten the fracture healing time for displaced mid-shaft clavicular fractures. Although the incidence of complications such as infection, nerve injury ,etc. were slightly higher, the shoulder function scored higher in the short term and long term follow-ups.

Objective

To compare the application of Nice knot assisted reduction (Nice knot fixed sphenoid fragment) and traditional reduction (screw fixed sphenoid fragment) in the treatment of adult displaced comminuted mid-shaft clavicular fracture (AO type 15-B2) , so as to provide reference for perioperative management in clinical practice.

Methods

From January 2017 to June 2019, a total of 47 cases with mid-shaft clavicular fractures (AO type 15-B2) were treated in our department with complete follow-ups, and the data were retrospectively analyzed. There were 22 cases in the Nice knot assisted reduction technique group, and 25 cases in the traditional reduction technique group. The operation duration, blood loss, VAS on the postoperative 2nd day, fracture healing time, postoperative complications and Neer scores of shoulder joint were analyzed and compared between two groups. The internal fixator complications included infection, internal fixator loosening, breakage and fragment displacement.

Results

Forty-seven patients were followed up for 6-15 months after surgery, with an average time of (10.7±3.5) months. In the Nice knot assisted reduction technique group, the operation time was 50-80 min with an average time of (66.45±7.24) min, the intraoperative blood loss was 18-40 ml , (29.73±5.63 ) ml, the VAS score was 1-5 (2.95±1.21) points on the second day after surgery, the fracture healing time was 11 -18 weeks with an average of (13.91±1.74) weeks, and the Neer score of shoulder joint was 90-100 (94.55±3.00) points in the last follow-up. In the traditional reduction technique group, the operative time of the was 55-91 min with an average of (73.24±10.97) min, and the intraoperative blood loss was 20-50 ml with an average of (35.44±8.52) ml, the VAS score was 1-6 (2.88±1.36) points on the second day after surgery, the fracture healing time was 12-18 weeks with an average time of (14.08±1.78) weeks, and the Neer score of shoulder joint was 90-100 (94.28±2.75) points in the last follow-up. By comparison, the Nice knot assisted reduction group had shorter operation time and less intraoperative blood loss than those in the traditional reduction group (P<0.05) , while there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in other evaluative indicators (P>0.05) . All the fractures in the two groups healed at the first stage. No internal fixator loosening, breakage or fragment displacement occurred.

Conclusions

The application of Nice knot assisted reduction in the treatment of displaced comminuted mid-shaft clavicular fractures shortened the operation time and reduced the intraoperative blood loss. The postoperative results were satisfactory. However, further multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled clinical studies are required to confirm and promote this technique.

表1 两组患者的临床资料
图1 患者,女,47岁,车祸伤 图A:术前X线片示右锁骨中段粉碎性骨折,有蝶形骨块;图B:复位骨折,巾钳夹持蝶形骨块,克氏针临时固定;图C:术中采用Nice结捆绑,固定蝶形骨块;图D:术后2 d ,右肩平片,蝶形骨块及骨折解剖复位;图E:术后3个月,右肩X线片示骨折愈合
图2 患者,女,54岁,车祸伤 图A :术前X线片示右锁骨中段粉碎性骨折,有蝶形骨块;图B:术后2 d,右肩平片,蝶形骨块及骨折解剖复位,用拉力螺钉固定蝶形骨块;图C:术后3个月,右肩X线片示骨折愈合
表2 两组患者治疗结果比较(±s)
[1]
van der Meijden OA, Gaskill TR, Millett PJ. Treatment of clavicle fractures: current concepts review[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg,2012,21(3):423-429.
[2]
Lenza M, Buchbinder R, Johnston RV, et al. Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating fractures of the middle third of the clavicle[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2019,1(1):CD009363.
[3]
杨飞,付中国.尼斯结联合解剖锁定钢板治疗成人锁骨中段粉碎骨折疗效分析[J/CD].中华肩肘外科电子杂志,2018,6(3):171-176.
[4]
McKee MD, Pedersen EM, Jones C, et al. Deficits following nonoperative treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am,2006,88(1):35-40.
[5]
Jones GL, Bishop JY, Lewis B, et al. Intraobserver and interobserver agreement in the classification and treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures[J]. Am J Sports Med,2014,42(5):1176-1181.
[6]
Robertson GA, Wood AM, Oliver CW. Displaced middle-third clavicle fracture management in sport: still a challenge in 2018. Should you call the surgeon to speed return to play?[J]. Br J Sports Med, 2018,52(6):348-349.
[7]
Guerra E, Previtali D, Tamborini S, et al. Midshaft clavicle fractures: surgery provides better results as compared with nonoperative treatment: a Meta-analysis[J]. Am J Sports Med,2019,47(14):3541-3551.
[8]
陈云丰.锁骨中段骨折的并发症[J/CD].中华肩肘外科电子杂志,2017,5(4):318.
[9]
Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society. Nonoperative treatment compared with plate fixation of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. A multicenter, randomized clinical trial[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2007,89(1):1-10.
[10]
Axelrod DE, Ekhtiari S, Bozzo A, et al. What is the best evidence for management ofdisplaced midshaft clavicle fractures? A system atic review and network meta-analysis of 22 randomized controlled trials[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res,2020,478(2):392-402.
[11]
Liu J, Srivastava K, Washington T, et al. Cost-effectiveness of operative versus nonoperative treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures: a decision analysis[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2019,101(1):35-47.
[12]
付中国, 吴克俭. 骨科缝线与打结[M]. 北京: 北京大学医学出版社, 2017: 61-65.
[13]
Chen M, Jin X, Fryhofer GW, et al. The application of the Nice knots as an auxiliary reduction technique in displaced comminuted patellar fractures[J]. Injury, 2020,51(2):466-472.
[14]
Boileau P, Alami G, Rumian A, et al. The doubled-suture nice knot[J]. Orthopedics,2017,40(2):e382-e386.
[15]
Hill SW, Chapman CR, Adeeb S, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of the Nice knot[J]. Int J Shoulder Surg, 2016,10(1):15-20.
[1] 刘瀚忠, 黄生辉, 万俊明, 李家春, 舒涛. 髌上入路和髌旁外侧入路髓内钉治疗胫骨骨折疗效比较[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 795-801.
[2] 周春林, 韩元龙, 丁飞, 吴玮杰. 踝关节骨折内固定术后形态变化及功能影响因素[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 736-740.
[3] 夏效泳, 王立超, 朱治国, 丛云海, 史宗新. 深度塌陷性胫骨平台骨折的形态特点和治疗策略[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 625-632.
[4] 齐伟亚, 方杰, 吴衡, 刘波. 掌侧小切口联合腕关节镜治疗AO-C型桡骨远端骨折[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 577-582.
[5] 吴祥, 黄必留, 雷彦文, 彭松根, 李胜山, 刘敏, 黄海燕, 黎世洲, 廖松南, 郭桥鸿, 张敬良. 腕关节镜联合3D打印微创治疗桡骨远端骨折[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 179-185.
[6] 莫亮, 熊贤梅, 马超, 刘予豪, 陈镇秋, 何伟, 周驰. 股骨颈骨折内固定术后因素与股骨头坏死关系的分析[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(06): 735-744.
[7] 唐小花, 孙建霞, 王君, 王美青. 预测老年股骨粗隆间骨折术后并发症的列线图模型构建[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(06): 677-682.
[8] 周晓强, 孙超, 李志强, 徐人杰, 佘远时, 张向鑫, 陈广祥, 虞宵. 动力抗旋交叉钉治疗不稳定股骨颈骨折的早期疗效[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(06): 670-676.
[9] 李凯, 刘振东, 贾大洲, 李小磊, 王静成. 股骨粗隆间骨折术后非感染性发热因素及风险模型[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(05): 547-554.
[10] 邓玖征, 袁野, 朱剑津, 何大炜, 赵喆, 赵锋, 孔德敬, 潘勇卫. 基于成人掌骨形态学数据设计的掌骨弹性髓内针治疗掌骨骨折的生物力学研究[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(04): 330-335.
[11] 王竹, 王庚启, 郑军, 端磊, 徐冰, 唐熙晨, 吴泊逸, 王秋根, 王建东, 曹雷, 毕春, 邓国英. 肘关节外侧入路治疗肱骨小头骨折的治疗体会及经验总结[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(03): 235-241.
[12] 张琳袁, 吴佳俊, 崔煦, 沈超, 付备刚, 崔崟, 王秀会, 蔡攀. 大结节解剖钢板与PHILOS内固定治疗伴肩关节脱位的Mutch I/II型肱骨大结节骨折的疗效差异[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(02): 139-145.
[13] 刘泽民, 张经, 王栋, 李岩, 常诗语, 张永红. 解剖锁定板是否联合带线锚钉重建喙锁韧带治疗不稳定性锁骨远端骨折疗效的Meta分析[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(01): 53-62.
[14] 金宇杰, 虞宵, 周晓强, 李志强, 徐人杰, 张向鑫, 陈广祥. 动力交叉钉系统治疗股骨颈骨折其内固定位置与临床疗效的相关性研究[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(04): 193-200.
[15] 邓京骐, 李涛, 朱振华, 李嘉成, 陈社强, 莫嘉俊, 廖奕岚, 刘沛一, 樊仕才. 改良LC-Ⅱ螺钉固定钉道的数字化分析与验证[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(03): 129-137.
阅读次数
全文


摘要