Revista espanola de cirugia ortopedica y traumatologia · 2023
Ipsilateral proximal and shaft femoral fractures: Results of two treatment strategies.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gómez Alcaraz J, Ajuria Fernández E, Auñón Martín I, Bustamante Recuenco D, Olaya González C, Capel Agúndez A
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Ipsilateral proximal and shaft femoral fractures typically occur in young adults after high-energy trauma. No consensus exists regarding the optimal internal fixation device or surgical strategy for these complex fractures. Our main objective is to identify differences on outcomes and complications between patients treated with one or combined implants.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: This is a single-center retrospective cohort study in patients with associated fractures of the proximal (31 AO) and shaft femur (32 AO). We divided the patients into two groups according to the use of single (GroupI) or combined implants (GroupII). Demographic, clinical, radiological, surgical data and development of complications were collected.
RESULTS: We identified 28 patients (19 men and 9 women) with an average age of 43years. We used an anterograde femoral nail in GroupI (17 patients) and a retrograde femoral nail or a plate associated with hip lag screws or sliding hip screw in GroupII (11 patients). Patients were followed up for 26.28 (9.12-62.88) months. Osteonecrosis of the femoral head, osteoarthritis, infection or nonunion was found in 9 patients (32%). No significant differences (P=.70) were found in complications between two groups or between definitive surgical fixation before or after the first 24h.
CONCLUSIONS: No differences in the development of complications or timing of definitive fixation were found between the use of one or combined implants in ipsilateral proximal femur and shaft fractures. Regardless of the implant chosen, an appropriate osteosynthesis technique is crucial, even so high complication rates are expected.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: This is a single-center retrospective cohort study in patients with associated fractures of the proximal (31 AO) and shaft femur (32 AO). We divided the patients into two groups according to the use of single (GroupI) or combined implants (GroupII). Demographic, clinical, radiological, surgical data and development of complications were collected.
RESULTS: We identified 28 patients (19 men and 9 women) with an average age of 43years. We used an anterograde femoral nail in GroupI (17 patients) and a retrograde femoral nail or a plate associated with hip lag screws or sliding hip screw in GroupII (11 patients). Patients were followed up for 26.28 (9.12-62.88) months. Osteonecrosis of the femoral head, osteoarthritis, infection or nonunion was found in 9 patients (32%). No significant differences (P=.70) were found in complications between two groups or between definitive surgical fixation before or after the first 24h.
CONCLUSIONS: No differences in the development of complications or timing of definitive fixation were found between the use of one or combined implants in ipsilateral proximal femur and shaft fractures. Regardless of the implant chosen, an appropriate osteosynthesis technique is crucial, even so high complication rates are expected.