本文選題：骨折 + 橈骨遠(yuǎn)端�。� 參考：《天津醫(yī)科大學(xué)》2017年博士論文

【摘要】：研究背景:橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折是常見的腕部損傷,其發(fā)生率呈現(xiàn)出逐年增長的趨勢。橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折病人的發(fā)生率每年大約為26/10000,占到所有前臂骨折患者的72%,占所有上肢骨折患者的8~17%,橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折病人占所有急診患者的1/6。橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折患者呈現(xiàn)出雙峰特征,即青年患者和老年患者。目前,切開復(fù)位鋼板內(nèi)固定手術(shù)是治療橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折一項可靠的手術(shù)技術(shù)。但究竟是掌側(cè)鋼板固定還是背側(cè)鋼板固定更恰當(dāng),仍存在爭論。在臨床上,橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折掌側(cè)鋼板固定非常流行,背側(cè)入路鋼板固定則相對較少。分析發(fā)生此現(xiàn)象的原因,可能受到傳統(tǒng)觀點影響,認(rèn)為掌側(cè)鋼板內(nèi)固定術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率相對較少,背側(cè)鋼板內(nèi)固定術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率相對較多。隨著最新研制的超薄低切跡背側(cè)鋼板的出現(xiàn),背側(cè)鋼板固定出現(xiàn)了更少的術(shù)后并發(fā)癥。但在臨床工作中我們發(fā)現(xiàn),掌側(cè)入路鋼板固定并不是萬能的,掌側(cè)鋼板固定在某些特定骨折類型上的應(yīng)用遭遇了一些內(nèi)固定失敗,骨折再移位甚至腕關(guān)節(jié)脫位等嚴(yán)重后果。這引起了我們的反思。研究目的:在臨床實踐中我們發(fā)現(xiàn),橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折根據(jù)受傷當(dāng)時的損傷機(jī)制,骨折形態(tài)表現(xiàn)出其各自特點。因此我們假設(shè)初始骨折移位方向能夠決定手術(shù)治療策略,并且恰當(dāng)應(yīng)用此理念能夠牢固固定移位骨折塊并能相應(yīng)減少術(shù)后內(nèi)固定失敗的發(fā)生率。因此我院創(chuàng)傷科進(jìn)行了一項前瞻性的實驗研究來進(jìn)行佐證。并且針對大家對背側(cè)鋼板內(nèi)固定的偏見,我們通過查閱國內(nèi)外相關(guān)文獻(xiàn),利用Meta分析比較掌、背側(cè)鋼板內(nèi)固定治療成人橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率的差異,為探究治療橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的最優(yōu)治療選擇提供臨床參考依據(jù)。研究方法:總結(jié)我院創(chuàng)傷科自2012年10月至2015年10月之間納入此項前瞻性研究有針對性手術(shù)治療的橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折病例34例。依據(jù)橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折初始掌側(cè)移位趨勢納入切開復(fù)位掌側(cè)鋼板內(nèi)固定組(15例),背側(cè)移位趨勢則納入背側(cè)鋼板內(nèi)固定組(19例)。治療主要觀察指標(biāo):腕關(guān)節(jié)功能結(jié)果,影像學(xué)結(jié)果,DASH評分及術(shù)后并發(fā)癥等。對于meta分析研究,我們在無語種限制的條件下檢索在2017年1月25日之前在國內(nèi)外公開發(fā)表的有關(guān)橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折使用掌側(cè)入路鋼板固定和背側(cè)入路鋼板固定術(shù)后相關(guān)并發(fā)癥對比的臨床對照試驗。使用Rev Man 5軟件合并相關(guān)數(shù)據(jù),對各種術(shù)后并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生率等數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計分析。研究結(jié)果:本臨床研究共納入橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折患者34例,男16例,女18例;年齡19~62歲,平均40.5歲。掌側(cè)脫位損傷組患者(15例)進(jìn)行掌側(cè)入路鋼板固定;背側(cè)脫位損傷組患者(19例)進(jìn)行背側(cè)入路鋼板固定。腕關(guān)節(jié)功能結(jié)果:與健側(cè)肢體對比,掌側(cè)鋼板組尺偏、橈偏及旋前、旋后功能表現(xiàn)相對良好,背側(cè)鋼板組旋前功能表現(xiàn)相對良好。在握力、掌曲及背伸功能方面兩組表現(xiàn)相當(dāng)。影像學(xué)結(jié)果:橈骨高度掌、背側(cè)入路均表現(xiàn)良好,均無明顯差異。DASH評分掌側(cè)脫位損傷組為18.2±15.3,背側(cè)脫位損傷組為14.5±16.4,兩組患者DASH評分結(jié)果良好。兩組對比無明顯差異。術(shù)后并發(fā)癥結(jié)果:掌側(cè)固定組1例肌腱炎,2例神經(jīng)癥狀,2例腕管綜合征,背側(cè)固定組1例肌腱斷裂,2例肌腱炎,1例神經(jīng)癥狀。總體并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率無明顯統(tǒng)計學(xué)差異。而我們的meta分析共有15篇文章納入研究。通過隨機(jī)效應(yīng)模型發(fā)現(xiàn),掌側(cè)入路與背側(cè)入路鋼板內(nèi)固定術(shù)后并發(fā)癥的總體發(fā)生率無統(tǒng)計學(xué)差異。(OR=0.79,95%CI:0.37-1.67;P=0.54)。亞組分析顯示:與背側(cè)入路鋼板固定相比,使用掌側(cè)入路鋼板固定后并發(fā)神經(jīng)病變(OR=1.83,95%CI:1.10,3.06;P=0.02)及腕管綜合征(OR=3.06;95%CI:1.07,8.79;P=0.04)的概率顯著增加,且有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。而使用背側(cè)入路固定后并發(fā)肌腱刺激癥(OR=0.33;95%CI:0.16,0.67;P=0.002)的概率顯著增加,且有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。而并發(fā)肌腱斷裂(OR=0.51;95%CI:0.22,1.16;P=0.11),復(fù)雜局部疼痛綜合征(CRPS)(OR=0.56;95%CI:0.25,1.25;P=0.16)與螺絲松動(OR=0.31;95%CI:0.08,1.31;P=0.11)的概率較大,但差異無統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。研究結(jié)論:依據(jù)此前瞻性研究結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn)上述假設(shè)結(jié)論成立。伸直型損傷中間柱骨折塊及腕關(guān)節(jié)移位趨勢為向背側(cè)脫位,故應(yīng)該采用背側(cè)入路,主要支撐接骨板放置于橈骨背側(cè)能很好地對抗骨折塊向背側(cè)移位趨勢。屈曲型損傷中間柱骨折塊及腕關(guān)節(jié)移位趨勢為向掌側(cè)脫位,故應(yīng)該采用掌側(cè)入路,主要支撐接骨板應(yīng)放置于橈骨掌側(cè)能很好地對抗骨折塊向掌側(cè)移位趨勢。此種內(nèi)固定方式的選擇可最大限度避免內(nèi)固定失效,防止腕關(guān)節(jié)半脫位或脫位的發(fā)生,降低手術(shù)并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率,近期臨床療效滿意。我們通過meta分析研究發(fā)現(xiàn)掌、背側(cè)入路鋼板置入固定后術(shù)后并發(fā)癥的總體發(fā)生率無顯著差異。與背側(cè)入路法相比,掌側(cè)入路鋼板固定后發(fā)生神經(jīng)病變與腕管綜合征的概率較高,而肌腱刺激癥則較低,而其他并發(fā)癥無明顯統(tǒng)計學(xué)差異。因此,我們應(yīng)該摒棄固有的對背側(cè)鋼板固定的偏見,也不能成為掌側(cè)鋼板固定方式的盲目追隨者�？陀^分析可見掌、背側(cè)入路鋼板固定技術(shù)各有其自身的優(yōu)缺點,我們不能僅僅依據(jù)掌、背側(cè)入路鋼板內(nèi)固定術(shù)后并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生率多少來評價孰優(yōu)孰劣,甚至決定手術(shù)策略,而應(yīng)該依據(jù)橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折移位趨勢特點來選擇掌側(cè)鋼板固定或是背側(cè)鋼板固定。
[Abstract]:Background: distal radius fracture is a common wrist injury. The incidence of the distal radius fracture is increasing year by year. The incidence of distal radius fractures is about 26/10000, accounting for 72% of all forearm fractures, 8~17% of all upper limb fractures, and distal radius fractures in all patients with 1/6. distal radius. The fractured patients are characterized by Shuangfeng's characteristics, namely, young patients and elderly patients. Open reduction and internal fixation is a reliable surgical technique for the treatment of distal radius fractures. However, it is still controversial whether the palmar plate or the dorsal plate is more appropriate. The dorsal plate fixation is relatively small. Analysis of the causes of this phenomenon may be influenced by traditional views. The incidence of complications after the internal fixation of the palmar plate is relatively small and the incidence of complications after the internal fixation of the dorsal plate is relatively more. There are fewer postoperative complications. But in clinical work, we found that the palmar approach plate fixation is not omnipotent. The application of the palmar plate to certain specific fracture types has encountered some serious consequences such as internal fixation failure, fracture redisplacement and even wrist dislocation. In clinical practice, we found that distal radius fractures show their respective characteristics according to the injury mechanism of injury at the time. Therefore, we assume that the orientation of the initial fracture displacement can determine the surgical strategy, and the proper application of this idea can firmly fix the displaced fracture block and reduce the occurrence of internal fixation failure accordingly. Therefore, the Department of Traumatology in our hospital has conducted a prospective experimental study to prove the difference in the incidence of complications in the treatment of distal radius fractures in adults by means of Meta analysis and comparison of the relevant literature at home and abroad. The best choice of treatment for distal radius fractures provides a clinical reference. A summary of the study in our department of Traumatology from October 2012 to October 2015 included 34 cases of distal radius fractures with targeted surgical treatment. The initial palmar displacement trend of the distal radius fracture was included in the open reduction and reduction of the palmar plate. In the fixed group (15 cases), the tendency of the dorsal displacement was included in the internal fixation group of the dorsal plate (19 cases). The main indicators were the results of the wrist joint function, the imaging results, the DASH score, and the postoperative complications. For the meta analysis, we searched for the publication of the related radius at home and abroad before January 25, 2017 under the condition of no language restriction. The clinical controlled trial of the relative complications of distal bone fractures using the palmar approach plate fixation and the dorsal plate fixation. The data of the incidence of postoperative complications were statistically analyzed with Rev Man 5 software combined with related data. Results: 34 cases of distal radius fractures were included in this clinical study, male 16 Cases, 18 women, aged 19~62 years, average 40.5 years old. Palmar dislocation injury group (15 cases) were fixed by palmar approach plate, and dorsal side dislocation group (19 cases) were fixed with dorsal approach plate. Wrist joint function results: compared with the healthy side, the palmar plate group ulnar deviation, radial deviation and pronation were relatively good, dorsal plate function was relatively good, dorsal plate The functional performance of the group was relatively good. The two groups were similar in the grip strength, the palmar flexure and the back extension function. The radiological results showed that the radial height palmar and the dorsal approach were all good. There was no significant difference in the.DASH score of the palmar dislocation in the group of 18.2 + 15.3, the dorsal side dislocation group was 14.5 + 16.4. The two groups had good results. The two groups were not compared. Postoperative complications: 1 cases of tendinitis in the palmar fixation group, 2 cases of nerve symptoms, 2 cases of carpal tunnel syndrome, 1 cases of tendon rupture in the dorsal fixation group, 2 cases of tendinitis and 1 cases of neurological symptoms. There were no significant differences in the incidence of complications in the total complication. There were 15 articles in our meta analysis. There was no significant difference in the overall incidence of complications after the lateral approach and the dorsal plate fixation. (OR=0.79,95%CI:0.37-1.67; P=0.54). The subgroup analysis showed that the neuropathy (OR=1.83,95%CI: 1.10,3.06; P=0.02) and carpal tunnel syndrome (OR=3.06; 95%CI:1.07,8) were accompanied by a palmar plate fixation compared with the dorsal approach plate fixation. The probability of.79; P=0.04) was significantly increased and statistically significant. The probability of concurrent tendon irritation (OR=0.33; 95%CI:0.16,0.67; P=0.002) after the use of the dorsal approach was significantly increased, with statistical significance. The complication of tendon rupture (OR=0.51; 95%CI:0.22,1.16; P= 0.11), and complex local pain syndrome (CRPS) (OR=0.56; 95%CI:0.25,1.25; P=0.) 16) the probability of screw loosening (OR=0.31; 95%CI:0.08,1.31; P=0.11) is larger, but the difference is not statistically significant. Conclusion: according to this prospective study, it is found that the above hypothesis is established. The fracture block and wrist displacement trend of the straight type injury middle column is to the dorsal side, so the dorsal approach should be adopted, mainly supporting the placement of the plate. On the dorsal side of the radius, the trend of the fracture block to the dorsal side of the fracture is very good. The displacement trend of the fracture block and the wrist joint is to the palmar dislocation. Therefore, the palmar approach should be adopted and the main support plate should be placed well against the palmar side of the radius. The choice of the internal fixation method is the most. In order to avoid internal fixation failure, prevent the occurrence of subluxation or dislocation of the wrist joint, reduce the incidence of surgical complications, and the recent clinical efficacy is satisfactory. We found that the overall incidence of complications after the fixation of the palmar plate after the fixation of the dorsal lateral approach plate has no significant difference. Compared with the dorsal approach, the palmar approach plate fixation is compared with the dorsal approach. The probability of subsequent neuropathy and carpal tunnel syndrome is higher, while the tendon irritation is low, but there is no significant difference in other complications. Therefore, we should abandon the inherent bias on the fixation of the dorsal plate, and can not be a blind followers of the fixation of the palmar plate. All of them have their own advantages and disadvantages. We can not only evaluate the incidence of complications after the internal fixation of the palmar and dorsal approach, and even determine the operation strategy. We should choose the palmar plate fixation or the dorsal plate fixation based on the trend characteristics of the distal radius fracture.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：天津醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：R687.3

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李暉;張_";鄭永發(fā);馬信龍;王沛;;應(yīng)用混合式骨外固定器治療橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折[J];天津醫(yī)科大學(xué)學(xué)報;2006年02期

2 王鎮(zhèn);;微創(chuàng)手術(shù)治療橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折28例分析[J];內(nèi)蒙古醫(yī)學(xué)院學(xué)報;2008年S1期

3 歐冬全;;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的治療進(jìn)展[J];江西醫(yī)學(xué)院學(xué)報;2009年08期

4 楊小華;;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折治療中常見問題及對策[J];中醫(yī)藥導(dǎo)報;2010年09期

5 胡洪生;孫杰;黃偉;;不穩(wěn)定型橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的治療分析[J];中國醫(yī)藥科學(xué);2011年20期

6 黃敏;;保守治療橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的預(yù)后分析[J];中國醫(yī)藥指南;2011年34期

7 ;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的治療建議[J];生物骨科材料與臨床研究;2011年06期

8 楊能;何愛詠;;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的研究進(jìn)展[J];中國現(xiàn)代手術(shù)學(xué)雜志;2012年01期

9 肖鵬賢;;手術(shù)治療橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的體會[J];內(nèi)蒙古中醫(yī)藥;2012年10期

10 劉建忠;劉紅露;馬健;徐英;;優(yōu)化方案治療橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折臨床觀察[J];實用中醫(yī)藥雜志;2012年09期

相關(guān)會議論文 前10條

1 包朝魯;鄭昱新;;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的兩種保守治療方法的比較[A];第九次全國中西醫(yī)結(jié)合創(chuàng)傷骨科學(xué)術(shù)大會論文匯編[C];2001年

2 盧薈;;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折治療概述與進(jìn)展[A];2012年浙江省手外科學(xué)暨顯微外科學(xué)學(xué)術(shù)年會論文集[C];2012年

3 呂楊;周方;田耘;姬洪全;張志山;;老年患者橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折手術(shù)和保守治療療效的比較[A];第七屆全國創(chuàng)傷學(xué)術(shù)會議暨2009海峽兩岸創(chuàng)傷醫(yī)學(xué)論壇論文匯編[C];2009年

4 邢宗英;劉朝暉;程立明;郭萬首;王冉東;鄒海波;;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的手術(shù)與保守治療療效比較[A];第十九屆中國康協(xié)肢殘康復(fù)學(xué)術(shù)年會論文選集[C];2010年

5 朱立軍;何柏康;呂維佳;梁佳利;裴國獻(xiàn);周肇平;;五種橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折固定方法的生物力學(xué)比較[A];中國康復(fù)醫(yī)學(xué)會修復(fù)重建外科專業(yè)委員會第十四次全國學(xué)術(shù)交流會論文集[C];2004年

6 蘇佳燦;禹寶慶;張春才;許碩貴;王家林;紀(jì)方;薛召軍;吳建國;丁祖泉;;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端解剖型鎳鈦記憶合金接骨器治療橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折生物力學(xué)計算與分析[A];全國中西醫(yī)結(jié)合學(xué)會骨傷科專業(yè)委員會第十二次學(xué)術(shù)年會浙江省中西醫(yī)結(jié)合學(xué)會骨傷科專業(yè)委員會第十次學(xué)術(shù)年會論文匯編[C];2004年

7 劉波;田潤;周麗靈;馮乙;楊世英;;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的手術(shù)治療(附25例報告)[A];2007年貴州省醫(yī)學(xué)會骨科學(xué)分會學(xué)術(shù)年會論文匯編[C];2007年

8 劉波;田潤;周麗靈;馮乙;楊世英;;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的手術(shù)治療[A];2007年貴州省醫(yī)學(xué)會骨科學(xué)分會學(xué)術(shù)年會論文匯編[C];2007年

9 王傳舜;王秋根;;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折[A];第二屆泛長江流域骨科新進(jìn)展研討會暨上頸椎傷病新理論新技術(shù)學(xué)習(xí)班論文匯編[C];2008年

10 周學(xué)文;張居適;任國衛(wèi);佟杰;康維杰;孟延豐;;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折中西醫(yī)治療療效分析[A];2008年浙江省骨科學(xué)學(xué)術(shù)年會論文匯編[C];2008年

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前4條

1 張權(quán);橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折[N];家庭醫(yī)生報;2007年

2 北京大學(xué)護(hù)理學(xué)院 龐冬;“叩門”訓(xùn)練有助橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折恢復(fù)[N];保健時報;2008年

3 上海市交通大學(xué)附屬第一人民醫(yī)院骨科 王秋根;腕骨骨折的規(guī)范治療[N];健康報;2007年

4 張進(jìn)川;洛陽正骨五聯(lián)法整復(fù)屈曲型橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折[N];中國中醫(yī)藥報;2004年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 宗雙樂;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折治療的臨床研究和薈萃分析[D];天津醫(yī)科大學(xué);2017年

2 李想;小夾板治療老年橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折中夾板束縛力的量化研究[D];廣州中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2011年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 陳勝樂;Rayback Ⅳ型橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折治療策略[D];河北醫(yī)科大學(xué);2015年

2 陳偉;三種不同外固定方式治療橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的療效分析[D];河北醫(yī)科大學(xué);2015年

3 方東;老年患者橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折保守與手術(shù)治療的療效比較[D];安徽醫(yī)科大學(xué);2015年

4 舒和喜;MRI在橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折軟組織損傷術(shù)前診斷中的應(yīng)用價值[D];蘇州大學(xué);2015年

5 王振旺;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折治療后尺骨撞擊綜合征[D];華北理工大學(xué);2015年

6 王高鋒;兩種手術(shù)方案治療不穩(wěn)定型橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的臨床研究[D];新疆醫(yī)科大學(xué);2015年

7 敖其爾巴圖;包金山教授學(xué)術(shù)思想和臨床經(jīng)驗的繼承整理及手法治療橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的臨床研究[D];北京中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2016年

8 張磊;切開復(fù)位內(nèi)固定治療橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的療效分析[D];東南大學(xué);2015年

9 侯云杰;橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折小夾板外固定量化模擬培訓(xùn)系統(tǒng)研究[D];北京中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2016年

10 王松;切開復(fù)位鋼板內(nèi)固定和閉合復(fù)位外固定架固定治療不穩(wěn)定型橈骨遠(yuǎn)端骨折的臨床研究[D];蘭州大學(xué);2016年

，

本文編號：1847385