Interlocking intramedullary nail versus minimally invasive percutaneous plate internal fixation in the treatment of middle or lower tibial fractures

LIU Changzhi

doi:10.7619/jcmp.201922015

Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice > 2019 > 23(22): 43-45, 48. > DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201922015

LIU Changzhi. Interlocking intramedullary nail versus minimally invasive percutaneous plate internal fixation in the treatment of middle or lower tibial fractures[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2019, 23(22): 43-45, 48. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201922015

Citation:

PDF (475 KB)

Interlocking intramedullary nail versus minimally invasive percutaneous plate internal fixation in the treatment of middle or lower tibial fractures

LIU Changzhi

Department of Orthopedics, Jishui County People′s Hospital, Ji′an, Jiangxi, 331600

More Information

Received Date: September 04, 2019
Accepted Date: October 17, 2019
Available Online: February 28, 2021
Published Date: November 27, 2019

Graphical Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Objective To investigate the difference of surgical effect between intramedullary nail (IMN) and minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis(MIPPO) in the treatment of middle or lower tibial fractures.
Methods A total of 80 patients with middle or lower tibial fractures admitted to our hospital were divided into IMN group (n=40) and MIPO group (n=40) according to radom table methal. All patients were followed up for 6 months in outpatient department. The indexes of operation and hospitalization, fracture healing time and surgery-related complications were compared between the two groups. Johner-Wruhs scoring system was used to evaluate ankle function after operation.
Results There were no significant differences in hospitalization time, callus formation time and fracture healing time between the two groups (P>0.05). The operation time and bleeding volume were (63.28±9.75) min, (87.32±16.42) mL, respectively, in MIPPO group, which were better than (71.16±11.23) min and (102.58±20.37) mL, respectively in IMN group(P < 0.05). All the patients were successfully followed up for 6 months, and no cases with malunion and internal fixation failure occurred. The complication rates of IMN group and MIPPO group were 7.50% and 12.50% respectively, and showed no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). Postoperative Johner-Wruhs scoring showed that the excellent recovery rate of ankle joint function in IMN group and MIPPO group was 90.00% and 92.50%, respectively, showing no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05).
Conclusion Both IMN and MIPPO are effective internal fixation for the treatment of middle and lower tibial fractures, and have similar effects in hospitalization time, fracture healing, surgical complications and recovery of ankle function. However, MIPPO has the advantage of shortening the operation time and reducing the amount of bleeding.

FullText(HTML)

References (13)

References

[1]	张志新, 周君东, 陈兴阳, 等. 锁定加压接骨板结合微创经皮钢板内固定技术与交锁髓内钉治疗老年性胫骨中下段骨折[J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2017, 21(15): 2378-2382. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2017.15.015
[2]	陈克伟, 程少文, 顾运涛, 等. 自体骨髓移植治疗胫骨中下段骨折延迟愈合或不愈合的疗效研究[J]. 中国骨与关节损伤杂志, 2017, 32(6): 645-646. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GGJS201706031.htm
[3]	黄国锋, 朱聪, 高建廷, 等. MIPPO技术与交锁髓内钉内固定治疗胫骨多段骨折的疗效比较[J]. 中国骨与关节损伤杂志, 2018, 33(2): 185-187. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GGJS201802030.htm
[4]	倪进荣, 邓杰林, 王立新. 专家型髓内钉与经皮锁定钢板治疗胫骨中下段骨折疗效比较[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2018, 22(3): 196-200. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XDSS201803009.htm
[5]	张小栋, 杨宝辉, 张婷, 等. 交锁髓内钉与经皮锁定钢板治疗胫骨骨折的临床对照研究[J]. 现代生物医学进展, 2017, 17(18): 3524-3527. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SWCX201718029.htm
[6]	范磊, 孙永青, 赵大中, 等. 经皮微创钢板内固定治疗胫骨平台骨折临床研究[J]. 临床军医杂志, 2018, 46(4): 439-441. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JYGZ201804016.htm
[7]	谭伟, 张叶松, 刘进炼, 等. 经皮微创锁定钢板和交锁髓内钉治疗成人胫骨中下段骨折的临床研究[J]. 创伤外科杂志, 2017, 19(12): 947-948. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-4237.2017.12.019
[8]	毛丰, 郭志, 郑军, 等. 腓骨后外侧入路联合微创经皮钢板内固定术治疗A3型胫腓骨远端骨折的前瞻性研究[J]. 中国骨与关节杂志, 2018, 7(7): 510-513. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-252X.2018.07.008
[9]	张鹏, 刘国辉. MIPO技术联合锁定加压钢板治疗胫骨中下段闭合骨折[J]. 临床骨科杂志, 2018, 21(3): 346-347. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-0287.2018.03.037
[10]	张斌剑, 牛荣. 微创内固定术治疗老年胫骨中下段骨折患者临床效果研究[J]. 陕西医学杂志, 2018, 47(4): 470-472. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-7377.2018.04.020
[11]	史少华, 王骏飞. MIPPO与IMN治疗胫骨远端关节外骨折的疗效及其对血清炎性因子的影响[J]. 海南医学, 2017, 28(13): 2089-2092. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-6350.2017.13.007
[12]	王勇, 苏建敏, 李中心, 等. IMN与MIPPO治疗胫骨中下段骨折的生物力学性能及对骨折愈合的影响[J]. 创伤外科杂志, 2018, 20(1): 30-33. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-4237.2018.01.007
[13]	熊圣仁, 林焱斌, 余光书, 等. 交锁髓内钉与钢板固定胫骨中下段骨折的生物力学研究[J]. 中华实验外科杂志, 2018, 35(8): 1503-1503. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1001-9030.2018.08.035

Cited By

Get Citation

PDF

XML

Article views (297) PDF downloads (4)

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Interlocking intramedullary nail versus minimally invasive percutaneous plate internal fixation in the treatment of middle or lower tibial fractures

Abstract

References

Catalog

Export File

Citation

Format

Content