1.Comparative study on the efficacy and postoperative infection of combined external fixator and Ilizarov in the treatment of open tibia-fibula fractures
Xinggui SONG ; Bo ZHU ; Mengchen ZHANG ; Yulin LI
Chinese Journal of Postgraduates of Medicine 2025;48(12):1096-1102
Objective:To comparatively the efficacy of the combined external fixator and the Ilizarov in the treatment of open tibia-fibula fractures and their influence on postoperative infection.Methods:A total of 215 patients with open tibio-fibula fractures diagnosed and treated at Tianjin Medical University General Hospital Airport Site from January 2021 to January 2024 were retrospectively selected as the research subjects. They were divided into the observation group (110 cases, using the combined external frame) and the control group (105 cases, using theIlizarov) according to the types of external fixators adopted. The clinical efficacy, bone healing condition, X-ray callus score, and serological indicators, including the bone morphogenetic protein (BMP-2), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), osteocalcin (OC), C-reactive protein (CRP) in the two groups were compared. The America Orthopedic Foot & Ankle Society(AOFAS) score, Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, and Health Survey Scale (SF-36) score were applied to evaluate the recovery of patients, and the postoperative infection conditions in the two groups were compared.Results:At 12 months after the operation, the excellent and good rate of clinical efficacy in the observation group was higher than that in the control group:90.00%(99/110) vs. 80.00%(84/105), there was statistical difference ( χ2 = 4.24, P<0.05). The complete weight-bearing time, swelling elimination time, bone healing time and postoperative hospital stay in the observation group were shorter than those in the control group:(144.73 ± 15.48) d vs. (152.12 ± 15.55) d, (11.25 ± 1.34) d vs. (13.18 ± 1.37) d, (123.01 ± 12.53) d vs. (136.38 ± 13.45) d, (30.15 ± 3.24) d vs. (31.47 ± 3.48) d, there were statistical differences ( P<0.01). The X-ray callus scores in the observation group at 1 week and 1, 3 and 6 months after the operation were higher than those in the control group: (1.37 ± 0.15) scores vs. (1.28 ± 0.14) scores, (7.65 ± 0.83) scores vs. (5.64 ± 0.75) scores,(12.34 ± 1.25) scores vs. (10.78 ± 1.16) scores,(14.52 ± 1.56) scores vs.(12.11 ± 1.35) scores, there were statistical differences ( P<0.01). Six months after the operation, the levels of BMP-2, VEGF and OC in the observation group were higher than those in the control group: (84.23 ± 8.51) ng/L vs. (76.79 ± 7.82) ng/L, (17.26 ± 1.83) ng/L vs. (15.34 ± 1.67) ng/L, (18.34 ± 1.92) μg/L vs. (6.48 ± 1.75) μg/L; while CRP was lower than that in the control group: (6.49 ± 0.76) mg/L vs. (7.13 ± 0.78) mg/L; there were statistical differences ( P<0.01). The scores of AOFAS, HSS and SF-36 in the observation group at 6 months after the operation were higher than those in the control group: (76.34 ± 7.85) scores vs. (70.11 ± 7.49) scores,(70.12 ± 7.63) scores vs. (67.77 ± 6.68) scores, (93.57 ± 10.34) scores vs. (85.73 ± 8.65) scores, there were statistical differences ( P<0.01 or <0.05). The patients were followed up for 12 months after the operation. There was no statistical difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusions:Compared with the Ilizarov, the combined external fixator has a better therapeutic effect in the treatment of open tibia-fibula fractures. It can promote the healing of bone wounds, improve joint function and quality of life, and has good safety.
2.Comparative study on the efficacy and postoperative infection of combined external fixator and Ilizarov in the treatment of open tibia-fibula fractures
Xinggui SONG ; Bo ZHU ; Mengchen ZHANG ; Yulin LI
Chinese Journal of Postgraduates of Medicine 2025;48(12):1096-1102
Objective:To comparatively the efficacy of the combined external fixator and the Ilizarov in the treatment of open tibia-fibula fractures and their influence on postoperative infection.Methods:A total of 215 patients with open tibio-fibula fractures diagnosed and treated at Tianjin Medical University General Hospital Airport Site from January 2021 to January 2024 were retrospectively selected as the research subjects. They were divided into the observation group (110 cases, using the combined external frame) and the control group (105 cases, using theIlizarov) according to the types of external fixators adopted. The clinical efficacy, bone healing condition, X-ray callus score, and serological indicators, including the bone morphogenetic protein (BMP-2), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), osteocalcin (OC), C-reactive protein (CRP) in the two groups were compared. The America Orthopedic Foot & Ankle Society(AOFAS) score, Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, and Health Survey Scale (SF-36) score were applied to evaluate the recovery of patients, and the postoperative infection conditions in the two groups were compared.Results:At 12 months after the operation, the excellent and good rate of clinical efficacy in the observation group was higher than that in the control group:90.00%(99/110) vs. 80.00%(84/105), there was statistical difference ( χ2 = 4.24, P<0.05). The complete weight-bearing time, swelling elimination time, bone healing time and postoperative hospital stay in the observation group were shorter than those in the control group:(144.73 ± 15.48) d vs. (152.12 ± 15.55) d, (11.25 ± 1.34) d vs. (13.18 ± 1.37) d, (123.01 ± 12.53) d vs. (136.38 ± 13.45) d, (30.15 ± 3.24) d vs. (31.47 ± 3.48) d, there were statistical differences ( P<0.01). The X-ray callus scores in the observation group at 1 week and 1, 3 and 6 months after the operation were higher than those in the control group: (1.37 ± 0.15) scores vs. (1.28 ± 0.14) scores, (7.65 ± 0.83) scores vs. (5.64 ± 0.75) scores,(12.34 ± 1.25) scores vs. (10.78 ± 1.16) scores,(14.52 ± 1.56) scores vs.(12.11 ± 1.35) scores, there were statistical differences ( P<0.01). Six months after the operation, the levels of BMP-2, VEGF and OC in the observation group were higher than those in the control group: (84.23 ± 8.51) ng/L vs. (76.79 ± 7.82) ng/L, (17.26 ± 1.83) ng/L vs. (15.34 ± 1.67) ng/L, (18.34 ± 1.92) μg/L vs. (6.48 ± 1.75) μg/L; while CRP was lower than that in the control group: (6.49 ± 0.76) mg/L vs. (7.13 ± 0.78) mg/L; there were statistical differences ( P<0.01). The scores of AOFAS, HSS and SF-36 in the observation group at 6 months after the operation were higher than those in the control group: (76.34 ± 7.85) scores vs. (70.11 ± 7.49) scores,(70.12 ± 7.63) scores vs. (67.77 ± 6.68) scores, (93.57 ± 10.34) scores vs. (85.73 ± 8.65) scores, there were statistical differences ( P<0.01 or <0.05). The patients were followed up for 12 months after the operation. There was no statistical difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusions:Compared with the Ilizarov, the combined external fixator has a better therapeutic effect in the treatment of open tibia-fibula fractures. It can promote the healing of bone wounds, improve joint function and quality of life, and has good safety.
Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail