MedElevator
Войти в исследования Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR · 2016
Treatment of acute perilunate dislocations: ORIF versus proximal row carpectomy.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Muller T, Hidalgo Diaz J J, Pire E, Prunières G, Facca S, Liverneaux P
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Some authors have proposed performing proximal row carpectomy (PRC) as the initial treatment for perilunate dislocations.
HYPOTHESIS: The goal of this retrospective study was to compare the results of a cohort of perilunate dislocation cases that were operated by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or by PRC between 2006 and 2011.
METHODS: The cohort consisted of 21 men with a mean age of 33years, who either had an isolated perilunate dislocation (7 cases) or a fracture-dislocation (14 cases). All dislocations were dorsal, with 10 stage I and 12 stage II. Thirteen patients had been treated by ORIF (group 1) a mean of 1.2days after the injury. Eight patients had been treated by PRC (group 2) a mean of 18.7days after the injury. Immobilization time was 6-12weeks in group 1 and 2weeks in group 2.
RESULTS: The mean operative time was 95minutes in group 1 and 65minutes in group 2. After a mean follow-up of 35months, the following outcomes were found for groups 1 and 2, respectively: pain 3/10 and 1/10, strength 77% and 73%, strength in supination 79% and 93%, strength in pronation 67% and 95%, QuickDASH 27/100 and 16/100, PRWE 43/150 and 15.5/150, flexion 69% and 57%, extension 84% and 58%, pronation 97% and 103%, supination 98% and 97%. There were four cases of osteoarthritis in both groups.
CONCLUSION: Treatment of acute perilunate dislocations by PRC leads to medium-term results that are at least as good as those with ORIF treatment. The surgery duration is shorter with PRC, as is the immobilization period.
TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective comparative.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
HYPOTHESIS: The goal of this retrospective study was to compare the results of a cohort of perilunate dislocation cases that were operated by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or by PRC between 2006 and 2011.
METHODS: The cohort consisted of 21 men with a mean age of 33years, who either had an isolated perilunate dislocation (7 cases) or a fracture-dislocation (14 cases). All dislocations were dorsal, with 10 stage I and 12 stage II. Thirteen patients had been treated by ORIF (group 1) a mean of 1.2days after the injury. Eight patients had been treated by PRC (group 2) a mean of 18.7days after the injury. Immobilization time was 6-12weeks in group 1 and 2weeks in group 2.
RESULTS: The mean operative time was 95minutes in group 1 and 65minutes in group 2. After a mean follow-up of 35months, the following outcomes were found for groups 1 and 2, respectively: pain 3/10 and 1/10, strength 77% and 73%, strength in supination 79% and 93%, strength in pronation 67% and 95%, QuickDASH 27/100 and 16/100, PRWE 43/150 and 15.5/150, flexion 69% and 57%, extension 84% and 58%, pronation 97% and 103%, supination 98% and 97%. There were four cases of osteoarthritis in both groups.
CONCLUSION: Treatment of acute perilunate dislocations by PRC leads to medium-term results that are at least as good as those with ORIF treatment. The surgery duration is shorter with PRC, as is the immobilization period.
TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective comparative.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.