Novel piston technique versus Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defect after lower limb infection.
Novel piston technique versus Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defect after lower limb infection.
复制标题
新型活塞技术与Ilizarov技术比较修复下肢感染后骨缺损
DOI：
10.1186/s13018-021-02844-1
复制
发表时间：
2021-12-04
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Shen H
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Du J;Yin Z;Cheng P;Han P;Shen H
BackgroundWe的目的是比较一种新的活塞技术与Ilizarov技术的有效性和并发症的修复骨缺损后下肢infection.Patients和methodsWe回顾性分析了41例患者谁曾在我们的部门治疗下肢骨缺损骨髓炎。有38名男性和3名女性，平均年龄为43.41岁（范围，12-69岁）。感染性骨缺损涉及36个胫骨和5个股骨。12例患者使用活塞技术（PT，A组），29例患者使用Ilizarov技术（IT，B组）。平均随访时间为28.50个月（PT）和29.90个月（IT）。Illizarov（ASAMI）标准的方法的修改应用被用来评估骨愈合和功能recovery.ResultsComplete根除感染和愈合对接网站完成在两组。A组平均外固定支架指数（BMD）为42.32天/cm，而B组为58.85天/cm（p< 0.001）。A组和B组的骨结局相似（p= 0.558）（优[9 vs. 19]，良[3 vs.10]）; A组的功能结局优于B组（p< 0.05）（优[7 vs. 6]，良[4 vs. 12]，一般[0 vs. 10]和差[1 vs. 1]）。疼痛是最常见的投诉在随访期间，和A组有较少的情况下，针道感染（1比6），相邻关节僵硬（3比8），和延迟愈合的关节（0比3）。结论满意的骨愈合可以通过使用PT和IT，虽然PT表现出更好的功能效果，较低的骨密度，并允许早期拆除外固定。我们发现，这种新型活塞技术可以提高患者的舒适度，减少并发症的发生率，并提供快速和方便的康复。
BackgroundWe aimed to compare the effectiveness and complications of a novel piston technique versus the Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defects after lower limb infection.Patients and methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 41 patients who had been treated at our department for lower extremity bone defects following osteomyelitis. There were 38 men and three women with a mean age of 43.41 (range, 12–69 years). The infected bone defects involved 36 tibias and five femurs. The piston technique (PT, group A) was used in 12 patients and the Ilizarov technique (IT, group B) in 29 patients. The mean follow-up period was 28.50 months (PT) and 29.90 months (IT). The modified Application of Methods of Illizarov (ASAMI) criteria was used to evaluate bone healing and functional recovery.ResultsComplete eradication of the infection and union of docking sites were accomplished in both groups. The mean external fixator index (EFI) was 42.32 days/cm in group A versus 58.85 days/cm in group B (p< 0.001). The bone outcomes were similar between groups A and B (p= 0.558) (excellent [9 vs. 19], good [3 vs.10]); group A showed better functional outcomes than group B (p< 0.05) (excellent [7 vs. 6], good [4 vs. 12], fair [0 vs. 10] and poor [1 vs. 1]). Pain was the most common complaint during follow-up, and group A had fewer cases of pin tract infection (1 vs. 6), adjacent joint stiffness (3 vs. 8), and delayed healing of the joint (0 vs. 3).ConclusionsSatisfactory bone healing can be achieved by using both PT and IT, although PT demonstrated better functional results, lower EFI, and allowed early removal of the external fixation. We found that this novel piston technique can improve the comfort of patients, reduce the incidence of complications, and provide rapid and convenient rehabilitation.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
1.6
作者：
Khan, Muhammad Shahid;Rashid, Haroon;Iqbal, Arshad
通讯作者：
Iqbal, Arshad
影响因子：
3.9
作者：
Sigmund, Irene K.;Ferguson, Jamie;McNally, Martin A.
通讯作者：
McNally, Martin A.
影响因子：
2.3
作者：
Griffith, Matthew H.;Gardner, Michael J.;Widmann, Roger F.
通讯作者：
Widmann, Roger F.
DOI：
10.2106/00004623-199506000-00004
发表时间：
1995-06-01
影响因子：
5.3
作者：
DENDRINOS, GK;KONTOS, S;LYRITSIS, E
通讯作者：
LYRITSIS, E
影响因子：
1.1
作者：
Lin, Chun-Cheng;Chen, Chuan-Mu;Chen, Tain-Hsiung
通讯作者：
Chen, Tain-Hsiung