期刊文献+

三种不同内固定方式对肱骨大结节骨折稳定性的影响 被引量:16

Effect of three different fixation techniques on stability of greater tuberosity fractures of humerus
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的对单纯肱骨大结节骨折的3种不同内固定方式(螺钉、张力带、肱骨大结节锁定钢板)进行生物力学测试,比较其稳定性,为临床肱骨大结节骨折内固定物的选择提供生物力学依据。方法取18具保留肩袖肌的新鲜冰冻成人肱骨尸体标本,建立肱骨大结节骨折模型后,随机编号分为3组,分别采用螺钉、张力带及肱骨大结节锁定钢板技术固定大结节骨折块,牵拉冈上肌,测试力-位移曲线,记录2组参数:大结节移位5 mm时力的大小(load to 5 mm yield point,LtYP)及失效负荷(load to failure,LtF)。结果 3组标本(螺钉组、张力带组、肱骨大结节锁定钢板组)在大结节移位5 mm时力的大小分别为(377±86)、(499±90)、(793±52)N,3组标本间LtYP差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);两两比较,锁定钢板组LtYP远大于螺钉组(本研究中仅3例在内固定失效前位移达到5 mm),差异有统计学意义(P<0.01),锁定钢板组LtYP相比张力带组差异有统计学意义(P<0.01),张力带组LtYP相对螺钉组表现出明显的统计学意义(P<0.01)。3组标本失效负荷分别为(744±112)、(908±93)、(979±143)N,3组标本间LtF差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);锁定钢板组LtF相对螺钉组具有明显的统计学意义(P<0.01),张力带组LtF相对螺钉组有统计学意义(P<0.01),但锁定钢板组LtF与张力带组之间无明显统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论肱骨大结节锁定钢板组相对螺钉组及张力带组表现出明显的生物力学优势,锁定钢板将为临床治疗单纯肱骨大结节骨折提供新的、更好的选择。 Objective To compare the stability of greater tuberosity fractures of humerus treated by three different fixation techniques (screws, tension band, locking plate, respectively) through biomechanical testing, so as to provide the biomechanics basis for choosing a better fixation in the clinical treatment for greater tuberosity fractures of humerus. Methods Standardized fracture models of the greater tuberosity from 18 fresh-frozen proximal humeri with intact rotator cuffs were created. The specimens were randomly assigned to 3 groups and treated by screws, tension band and locking plates, respectively. An increasing force was applied to the supraspinatus tendon. The force displacement curve and two parameters: LtYP(Load to 5 mm yield point) and Ltf(load to failure) were recorded. Results LtYP from the screw group, tension band group and locking plate group was (377±86), (499±90), (793±52) N, respectively, with significant differences among the three groups (P〈0.01). Significant differences were also found between the groups as locking plate group (only 3 cases in locking plate group reached to 5 mm displacement before LtF in this study ) and screw group, locking plate group and tension band group, tension band group and screw group (P〈0.01). LtF of screw group, tension band group and locking plate group was (744±112), (908±93), (979±143) N, respectively, showing significant differences among them, and which were also found between locking plate group and screw group, tension band group and screw group (P〈0.01), but no significant differences were found between locking plate group and tension band group (P〉0.05). Conclusions Locking plates show more obvious biomechanical stability than screws and tension band, which provides a new and better choice for treatment of isolated greater tuberosity fractures of humerus.
出处 《医用生物力学》 EI CAS CSCD 北大核心 2013年第6期636-641,共6页 Journal of Medical Biomechanics
关键词 骨折 肱骨大结节 内固定 力学测试 Fracture Greater tuberosity of humerus Internal fixation Mechanical testing
  • 相关文献

参考文献24

  • 1Gruson KI, Ruchelsrnan DE, Tejwani NC. Isolated tuber?osity fractures of the proximal humeral: Current concepts[J]. Injury, 2008, 39(3): 284-298.
  • 2Williams GR, Wong KL. Two-part and three-part fractures: Open reduction and internal fixation versus closed reduction and percutaneous pinning[J]. Orthop Clin North Am, 2000, 31 (1) : 1-21.
  • 3Platzer P, Thalhammer G, Oberleitner G, et al. Displaced fractures of the greater tuberosity: A comparison of opera?tive and non operative treatment[J].J Trauma, 2008, 65 (4) : 843-848.
  • 4Dimakopoulos P, Panagopoulos A, Kasimatis G. Tran?sosseous suture fixation of proximal humeral fractures[J] .J BoneJt Surg Am, 2007,89(8): 1700-1709.
  • 5Schoff V, Popp D, Strecker W. A simple and efective im?plant for displaced fractures of the greater tuberosity: The "Bamberg" plate[J]. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2011, 131(4): 509-512.
  • 6Braunstein V, Wiedemann E, Piitz W, et al. Operative treatment of greater tuberosity fractures of the humerus-A biomechanical analysis[J]. Clin Biomech, 2007, 22 ( 6 ) : 652-657.
  • 7Mattyasovszky SG, Burkhart KJ, Ahlers C, et al. Isolated fractures ofthe greater tuberosity of the proximal humerus: A long-term retrospective study of 30 patients[J]. Acta Orthop, 2011,82(6): 714-720.
  • 8Yin B, Moen TC, Thompson SA, et al. Operative treat?ment of isolated greater tuberosity fractures: Retrospective review of clinical and functional outcomes[J]. Orthope?dics, 2012, 35(6): e807-e804.
  • 9Smith AM, Mardones RM, SperlingJW, et al. Early com?plications of operatively treated proximal humeral fractures[J].J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2007, 16 (1 ) : 14-24.
  • 10Thanasas C, Kontakis G, Angoules A, et al. Treatment of proximal humerus fractures with locking plates: A systemat?ic review[J].J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2009, 18 ( 6 ) : 837- 844.

二级参考文献49

  • 1赵均海,刘彦东.复杂受力下股骨应力分析[J].医用生物力学,2006,21(4):317-321. 被引量:8
  • 2Stewart MJ ,Wallace SL. Fractures of the distal of the femur: A comparison of treatmeat [J] .J Bone Joint Surg (Am),1996,48:784.
  • 3Kolmert L, Wulff K. Epideiology and treatment of distal femoral fractures in adults [J].Acta Orthop Scand,1982, 53257-962.
  • 4Kregor P J, Stannard J, Zlowodzki M, et al. Distal femoral fracture fixation utilizing the less invasive stabilization system(LISS): The technique and early results [J]. Injury, 2001,32 (3):SC32 -47.
  • 5Stover M Holmes W. Distal femoral fracture :current treatment results and problems[J].Injury2001,32 (sup 3):3- 13.
  • 6Schatzker J,Miclau T. Fractures of the distal femur revisited [ J]. Clin Orthop,1998,43-56.
  • 7Mast JW, Ganz R. Planning and reduction technique in fracture surgery [ M]. New York: Springer-Verlag,1989:53- 57.
  • 8Krettek C, Schandelmaier I, Bertram R, et al. Transarticular joint reconstruction and indirect plate osteosynthesis for complex distal supracondylar femoral fractures [J]. Injury,199728 ( Sup.1 ):A31 -A41.
  • 9Schutz M,Krettek C.Minimally invasive fracture stabilization of distal femoral fractures with the LISS: A prospective multicenter study. Results of a clinical study with special emphasis on difficult cases [J].Injury,2001,32 (Sup. 3): 48-54.
  • 10Schutz M, Haas N. Less invasive stabilization system (LISS)in the treatment of distal femoral fracture[J]. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech,2003,70:74-82.

共引文献42

同被引文献95

引证文献16

二级引证文献64

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部