Comparative analysis of three different implants for the internal fixation of Mason Ⅱ-Ⅲ radial head fractures
10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2017.27.012
- VernacularTitle:三种植入物内固定修复MasonⅡ-Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折的比较
- Author:
Jianfeng LU
;
Zhi-hao CUI
;
Fei-wei LU
;
Zong-bao LIU
;
Zhi-rong WANG
;
- From:
Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research
2017;21(27):4330-4335
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Absorbable material is a hotspot in orthopedics, which is biodegradable, avoids fixation residues and second surgical trauma compared with the traditional internal fixation.OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of K-wires, screws and absorbable rods for the internal fixation of Mason II-III radial head fractures.METHODS: Totally 45 patients with Mason Ⅱ-Ⅲ radial head fractures were collected from January 2010 to December 2015 admited in Zhangjiagang First People's Hospital and Zhangjiagang Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, and were then divided into three groups (n=15 per group), followed by implanted with K-wires (group A), screws (group B)and absorbable rods (group C), respectively. The baseline data, operation time, blood loss, healing time, Mayo and Broberg-Morrey scores were compared among groups.RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) There were no significant differences in the baseline data, operation time, blood loss,and healing time among groups (P > 0.05). (2) The Mayo scores in the groups A, B, and C were (88.45±6.22),(92.37±5.60), and (90.82±6.58), respectively; the Broberg-Morrey scores in the groups A, B, and C group were ((90.82±6.83), (93.05±6.54), and (91.68±7.15), respectively; all above scores showed no significant differences among groups (P > 0.05). (4) The total incidence rate of complications in the groups A, B, and C was 20％ (2/15), 13％ (2/15),and 7％ (1/15) respectively, showing no significant difference among groups (P > 0.05). (4) These results indicate that the absorbable rods can obtain satisfactory treatment outcomes for Mason II-III radial head fractures, which is equivalent to the traditional internal fixation. Moreover, it can avoid secondary operation for removing internal fixators and the adverse impact of stress shielding, so it is recommended to be used in clinic.
