Comparison of three fixation methods in treating anterior pelvic ring fractures

YUAN Peng; ZHOU Yiyi; LIU Yi; MAO Yiheng; YANG Huilin

doi:10.7619/jcmp.20211440

Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice > 2021 > 25(12): 70-73. > DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.20211440

YUAN Peng, ZHOU Yiyi, LIU Yi, MAO Yiheng, YANG Huilin. Comparison of three fixation methods in treating anterior pelvic ring fractures[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2021, 25(12): 70-73. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.20211440

Citation:

PDF (579 KB)

Comparison of three fixation methods in treating anterior pelvic ring fractures

1.
Department of Orthopedics, Wuxi People's Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing Medical University, Wuxi, Jiangsu, 214030
2.
Health Management Center, Wuxi People's Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing Medical University, Wuxi, Jiangsu, 214030
3.
Department of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, 215006

More Information

Received Date: April 01, 2021
Available Online: July 04, 2021
Published Date: June 27, 2021

Graphical Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Objective To observe the effects of internal fixation of modified Stoppa approach, external fixation and internal fixation of minimally invasive transperiosteal plate in treatment of anterior pelvic ring fractures.
Methods Clinical data of 98 patients with anterior pelvic ring fracture was retrospectively analyzed, and they were divided into group A, group B, and group C according to different treatment methods. The group A(33 cases) received modified Stoppa approach internal fixation, group B(31 cases) received external fixation of modified Stoppa approach, group C(34 cases) received minimally invasive transperiosteal plate internal fixation. Related indicators of surgery, postoperative fracture reduction conditions, clinical efficacy, and incidence of complications in the three groups were compared.
Results The incision length, operation time, intraoperative blood loss and fracture healing time in the three groups showed statistically significant differences(P < 0.05). The fracture reduction and clinical total effective rate of groups A and C were better than those of group B (P < 0.05). However, there was no statistical significance in the fracture reduction and clinical total effective rate between groups A and C (P>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications among the three groups (P>0.05).
Conclusion Compared with external fixation, modified Stoppa approach internal fixation and minimally invasive transperiosteal plate internal fixation have shorter healing time, better fracture reduction and clinical efficacy, and fewer postoperative complications.

FullText(HTML)

References (17)

References

[1]	郭剑, 雷洁洁, 章柏平, 等. 新型无创外固定装置在骨盆骨折院前急救中的临床应用[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2020, 24(3): 26-28, 32. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XYZL202003008.htm
[2]	刘敏, 周晓赛, 王俊诚, 等. 不同方法治疗不稳定骨盆骨折中前环损伤的有限元分析[J]. 中国骨伤, 2019, 32(2): 156-160. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-0034.2019.02.012
[3]	张向敏, 杨福成, 周建飞, 等. 改良stoppa入路用于髋臼前柱及骨盆前环骨折的解剖学和临床效果研究[J]. 广西医科大学学报, 2019, 36(8): 1305-1309. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GXYD201908021.htm
[4]	王建超, 高嵩, 刘继军, 等. 微创经皮钢板内固定与皮下前环内置外架固定治疗骨盆前环骨折的疗效比较[J]. 中华创伤骨科杂志, 2019, 21(12): 1041-1046. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-7600.2019.12.005
[5]	孟娟, 陈改梅, 王彩燕. 两种微创技术治疗骨盆骨折的临床效果分析[J]. 西北国防医学杂志, 2020, 41(7): 422-427. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XBGY202007018.htm
[6]	MATTA J M, TORNETTA P. Internal fixation of unstable pelvic ring injuries[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1996(329): 129-140. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8769444
[7]	MAJEED S A. Grading the outcome of pelvic fractures[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1989, 71(2): 304-306. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2925751
[8]	夏雄超, 刘伟, 林伟文, 等. 改良stoppa入路切开复位内固定治疗tile C型骨盆骨折合并髋臼双柱骨折[J]. 中华创伤骨科杂志, 2019, 21(12): 1069-1072. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-7600.2019.12.010
[9]	卢国良, 潘耀成, 邹泽良. 改良下腹正中切口内固定与外固定治疗骨盆前环骨折的对比研究[J]. 中国医药导报, 2020, 17(3): 74-77. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YYCY202003019.htm
[10]	付忠泉, 陈健荣, 禤天航, 等. 改良stoppa入路在髋臼及骨盆骨折手术治疗中的应用[J]. 实用医院临床杂志, 2019, 16(5): 119-121. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-6170.2019.05.036
[11]	姜铧财, 龙雳, 郭晓东, 等. 内置外架与外固定支架固定治疗骨盆前环骨折的疗效比较[J]. 中华创伤骨科杂志, 2019, 21(3): 213-217. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SGKZ202005004.htm
[12]	杨博文, 刘彪, 昊元勇, 等. 经皮螺钉内固定联合外固定架与切开复位内固定治疗不稳定骨盆骨折的比较[J]. 中国骨与关节损伤杂志, 2020, 35(10): 1045-1047. doi: 10.7531/j.issn.1672-9935.2020.10.010
[13]	罗兴良, 吴坚, 单贤贞. 重建钢板经不同入路内固定治疗骨盆骨折的疗效[J]. 临床骨科杂志, 2019, 22(3): 288-291. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-0287.2019.03.012
[14]	沈亚骏, 范磊, 王云华. 3D打印技术辅助stoppa入路手术治疗不稳定性盆骨骨折合并髋臼骨折的临床研究[J]. 临床和实验医学杂志, 2019, 18(7): 741-744. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-4695.2019.07.021
[15]	曾铮, 曾芬莲, 敖俊. 骨盆前环骨折微创手术研究进展[J]. 国际骨科学杂志, 2019, 40(3): 152-154, 159. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-7083.2019.03.007
[16]	蔡成成, 席永斌, 罗海滨. 改良stoppa入路内固定与外固定治疗骨盆前环骨折[J]. 临床骨科杂志, 2019, 22(3): 284-287, 291. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-0287.2019.03.011
[17]	王翔宇, 余志勇, 张俊松. 不同骨盆前环固定方式在骨盆前环骨折治疗中的应用对比[J]. 中国临床医生杂志, 2019, 47(11): 1345-1348. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-8552.2019.11.028

Cited By

Get Citation

PDF

XML

Article views (330) PDF downloads (6)

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Comparison of three fixation methods in treating anterior pelvic ring fractures

Abstract

References

Catalog

Export File

Citation

Format

Content