Cargando…
Medial malleolar window approach for varus-type tibial pilon fractures: a retrospective study
PURPOSE: Choosing a suitable surgical approach is crucial and challenging for type C pilon fractures. This article aims to explore the clinical efficacy of the medial malleolar window approach for varus-type tibial pilon fractures. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 38 patients with...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10163773/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37149577 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06444-4 |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: Choosing a suitable surgical approach is crucial and challenging for type C pilon fractures. This article aims to explore the clinical efficacy of the medial malleolar window approach for varus-type tibial pilon fractures. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 38 patients with type C varus-type pilon fractures treated between May 2018 and June 2021. In total, 16 cases underwent surgical treatment through the medial malleolar window approach and 22 cases were treated with the traditional anteromedial approach combined with a posterior approach. The operation time, hospitalization time, fracture healing time, the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle score, Visual Analogue Scale, and complications were recorded to comprehensively evaluate the clinical efficacy of the technique. Fracture reduction quality was evaluated using the criteria proposed by Burwell and Charnley. RESULTS: All patients were followed up. No patients presented delayed union or nonunion. Compared with the conventional approach, the medial malleolar window approach had the advantage of better clinical effect recovery and better fracture reduction (P < 0.05). Meanwhile, the medial malleolar window approach had a shorter operation time, although the statistics suggest no significant difference with the control group. No implant exposure or infection occurred. There was good wound healing at two weeks after surgery in all but two cases. Local wound edge necrosis developed in one case in the medial malleolar window approach group, and the wound could not be closed at one stage in another case in the conventional group because of excessive tension, requiring secondary closure. CONCLUSION: The medial malleolar window approach provides excellent exposure to type C pilon fractures, allowing for satisfactory fracture reduction and functional rehabilitation. The medial window approach is recommended for varus-type pilon fractures, which can effectively avoid a posterior incision and reduce the operation time. |
---|