Carbon/PEEK nails: a case–control study of 22 cases
Carbon/PEEK nails: a case–control study of 22 cases
复制标题
碳/PEEK钉：22例病例对照研究
DOI：
10.1007/s00590-019-02602-4
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
1.7
通讯作者：
R. Capanna
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
F. Sacchetti;L. Andreani;Michele Palazzuolo;S. Cherix;E. Bonicoli;E. Neri;R. Capanna
背景碳/PEEK接骨板和髓内钉的研究越来越受到关注。接近骨的弹性模量、高承载能力和射线可透性使CFR/PEEK材料成为潜在的突破。文献中有大量关于CFR/PEEK接骨板治疗肱骨近端、桡骨远端和腓骨远端骨折的数据。在受骨转移影响的患者中，CFR/PEEK髓内钉在12个月的随访中被证明是有效和安全的。很少有人知道CFR/PEEK钉的性能在受其他pathology.PurposesThe研究的目的是评估CFR/PEEK钉在治疗各种病理条件的安全性和有效性。它也被调查，无论射线可透性的这种钉可能会导致一个更客观的评价骨痂或疾病situ.Patients和methodsIn研究组包括20例（22个骨段）谁接受CFR/PEEK钉植入（8肱骨，胫骨，股骨和4膝关节融合术）。他们受到病理性骨折的影响，在4例病例中，他们需要膝关节固定术。考虑髓内钉失效和骨痂或疾病进展（RUSH评分），对其进行回顾性评价。平均随访时间为11个月（最小6.8-最大20.3）。对照组包括在同一机构因相同病理接受钛钉治疗的患者。在两组中进行组间相关系数（ICC）分析，考虑到来自两个机构的两名专家外科医生的RUSH评分，以评估射线可透性是否可以导致对疾病或骨痂部位的更客观评估。CFR/PEEK组的IC95%：0.702-0.953，而钛组为0.778（IC95%：0.41-0.91）。观察者评价显示钛髓内钉的遮蔽明显高于CFR/PEEK髓内钉。两组均未报告接骨术失败。ConclusionsOur结果证实了CFR/PEEK钉在中短期内的安全性。与钛组相比，这些材料的射线可透性使我们的观察者对骨痂形成或疾病进展进行了更客观的评价，因为ICC更高。证据等级：III病例对照治疗研究。
BackgroundInterest around carbon/PEEK plates and nails has been raising. The elastic modulus close to the bone, the high load-carrying capacity and radiolucency make CFR/PEEK materials a potential breakthrough. In the literature, there are abundant data about CFR/PEEK plates in the treatment of proximal humerus, distal radius and distal fibula fractures. In patients affected by bone metastasis, CFR/PEEK nails were proved effective and safe with 12 months of follow-up. Very little is known about performances of CFR/PEEK nails in patients affected by other pathologies.PurposesThe aim of the study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of CFR/PEEK nails in the treatment of various pathological conditions. It was also investigated whatever radiolucency of this nails could lead to a more objective evaluation of bone callus or disease site.Patients and methodsIn the study group were included 20 patients (22 bone segments) who underwent CFR/PEEK nail implantation (eight humerus, one tibia, nine femur and four knee arthrodesis). They were affected by pathological fractures, and in four cases, they required an arthrodesis of the knee. They were retrospectively evaluated considering nail failures and bone callus or disease progression (RUSH scores). Mean follow-up time was 11 months (min 6.8–max 20.3). In the control group were included patients treated with titanium nails in the same institution for the same pathologies. An interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis was performed in both groups considering RUSH scores by two expert surgeon from two institution to assess whether radiolucency could lead to a more objective evaluation of disease or bone callus site.ResultsThe ICC of mean values between RUSH scores was 0.882 (IC 95%: 0.702–0.953) in the CFR/PEEK group, while it was 0.778 (IC 95%: 0.41–0.91) in the titanium group. Observers’ evaluation showed a significantly higher obscuration by titanium nails than by CFR/PEEK nails. No osteosynthesis failures were reported in both groups.ConclusionsOur results confirm the safety of CFR/PEEK nails in the short–medium term. The radiolucency of these materials led our observers to perform more objective evaluations of bone callus formation or disease progression compared to the titanium group given the higher ICC.Level of evidence: III Case–control therapeutic study.