Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR · 2022
Pararectus approach vs. Stoppa approach for the treatment of acetabular fractures - a comparison of approach-related complications and operative outcome parameters from the German Pelvic Registry.
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.
Küper Markus A, Röhm Björn, Audretsch Christof, Stöckle Ulrich, Höch Andreas, Histing Tina, Stuby Fabian M, Trulson Alexander, Herath Steven C, Working Group on Pelvic Fractures of the German Trauma Society
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The Pararectus approach has been introduced as an alternative anterior approach to the Stoppa approach in acetabular surgery. There is no evidence which approach should be preferred, especially regarding approach-related complications. Therefore, aim of this registry study was to compare the Pararectus approach to the Stoppa approach regarding complications and quality of reduction.
METHODS: Patients from the German Pelvic Registry with a surgically treated acetabular fracture, either through the Pararectus approach or the Stoppa approach, were analyzed or compared regarding demographic, clinical and operative parameters.
RESULTS: In total, 384 patients with an acetabular fracture received a surgical procedure with either the Pararectus approach (n=120) or the Stoppa approach (n=264). There were no differences between the two groups regarding demographic parameters and fracture pattern. The overall complication rate (35.0% vs. 31.4%), the mortality rate (5.0% vs. 3.0%) and the osteosynthesis-associated complication rate (5.8% vs. 4.2%) tended to be higher in the Pararectus group with no statistical significance. There were significantly more anatomical reductions in the Pararectus group (56% vs. 43%; p=0.01). However, operation time was significantly longer in the Pararectus group (255±125 vs. 205±103 minutes; p<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Despite a longer operation time, the Pararectus approach and the Stoppa approach are equivalently applicable for the treatment of acetabular fractures regarding complication rates and quality of reduction.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective comparative study.
METHODS: Patients from the German Pelvic Registry with a surgically treated acetabular fracture, either through the Pararectus approach or the Stoppa approach, were analyzed or compared regarding demographic, clinical and operative parameters.
RESULTS: In total, 384 patients with an acetabular fracture received a surgical procedure with either the Pararectus approach (n=120) or the Stoppa approach (n=264). There were no differences between the two groups regarding demographic parameters and fracture pattern. The overall complication rate (35.0% vs. 31.4%), the mortality rate (5.0% vs. 3.0%) and the osteosynthesis-associated complication rate (5.8% vs. 4.2%) tended to be higher in the Pararectus group with no statistical significance. There were significantly more anatomical reductions in the Pararectus group (56% vs. 43%; p=0.01). However, operation time was significantly longer in the Pararectus group (255±125 vs. 205±103 minutes; p<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Despite a longer operation time, the Pararectus approach and the Stoppa approach are equivalently applicable for the treatment of acetabular fractures regarding complication rates and quality of reduction.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective comparative study.