Cargando…

Modified pedicle screw-rod versus anterior subcutaneous internal pelvic fixation for unstable anterior pelvic ring fracture: a retrospective study and finite element analysis

OBJECTIVES: This study compared the stability and clinical outcomes of modified pedicle screw-rod fixation (MPSRF) and anterior subcutaneous internal pelvic fixation (INFIX) for the treatment of anterior pelvic ring fractures using the Tornetta and Matta grading system and finite element analyses (F...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pan, Zhi-Hong, Chen, Fan-Cheng, Huang, Jun-Ming, Sun, Cheng-Yi, Ding, Sheng-Long
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8314600/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34315524
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-021-02618-9
_version_ 1783729584638787584
author Pan, Zhi-Hong
Chen, Fan-Cheng
Huang, Jun-Ming
Sun, Cheng-Yi
Ding, Sheng-Long
author_facet Pan, Zhi-Hong
Chen, Fan-Cheng
Huang, Jun-Ming
Sun, Cheng-Yi
Ding, Sheng-Long
author_sort Pan, Zhi-Hong
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: This study compared the stability and clinical outcomes of modified pedicle screw-rod fixation (MPSRF) and anterior subcutaneous internal pelvic fixation (INFIX) for the treatment of anterior pelvic ring fractures using the Tornetta and Matta grading system and finite element analyses (FEA). METHODS: In a retrospective review of a consecutive patient series, 63 patients with Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA)/Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) type B or C pelvic ring fractures were treated by MPRSF (n = 30) or INFIX (n = 33). The main outcome measures were the Majeed score, incidence of complications, and adverse outcomes, and fixation stability as evaluated by finite element analysis. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were included in the study, with an average age of 34.4 and 36.2 in modified group and conventional group, respectively. Two groups did not differ in terms of the injury severity score, OTA classification, cause of injury, and time to pelvic surgery. However, the MPSRF group had a rate of higher satisfactory results according to the Tornetta and Matta grading system than the conventional group (73.33% vs 63.63%) as well as a higher Majeed score (81.5 ± 10.4 vs 76.3 ± 11.2), and these differences were statistically significant at 6 months post-surgery. FEA showed that MPSRF was stiffer and more stable than INFIX and had a lower risk of implant failure. CONCLUSIONS: Both MPSRF and INFIX provide acceptable biomechanical stability for the treatment of unstable anterior pelvic ring fractures. However, MPSRF provides better fixation stability and a lower risk of implant failure, and can thus lead to better clinical outcomes. Therefore, MPSRF should be more widely applied to anterior pelvic ring fractures SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-021-02618-9.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8314600
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83146002021-07-28 Modified pedicle screw-rod versus anterior subcutaneous internal pelvic fixation for unstable anterior pelvic ring fracture: a retrospective study and finite element analysis Pan, Zhi-Hong Chen, Fan-Cheng Huang, Jun-Ming Sun, Cheng-Yi Ding, Sheng-Long J Orthop Surg Res Research Article OBJECTIVES: This study compared the stability and clinical outcomes of modified pedicle screw-rod fixation (MPSRF) and anterior subcutaneous internal pelvic fixation (INFIX) for the treatment of anterior pelvic ring fractures using the Tornetta and Matta grading system and finite element analyses (FEA). METHODS: In a retrospective review of a consecutive patient series, 63 patients with Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA)/Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) type B or C pelvic ring fractures were treated by MPRSF (n = 30) or INFIX (n = 33). The main outcome measures were the Majeed score, incidence of complications, and adverse outcomes, and fixation stability as evaluated by finite element analysis. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were included in the study, with an average age of 34.4 and 36.2 in modified group and conventional group, respectively. Two groups did not differ in terms of the injury severity score, OTA classification, cause of injury, and time to pelvic surgery. However, the MPSRF group had a rate of higher satisfactory results according to the Tornetta and Matta grading system than the conventional group (73.33% vs 63.63%) as well as a higher Majeed score (81.5 ± 10.4 vs 76.3 ± 11.2), and these differences were statistically significant at 6 months post-surgery. FEA showed that MPSRF was stiffer and more stable than INFIX and had a lower risk of implant failure. CONCLUSIONS: Both MPSRF and INFIX provide acceptable biomechanical stability for the treatment of unstable anterior pelvic ring fractures. However, MPSRF provides better fixation stability and a lower risk of implant failure, and can thus lead to better clinical outcomes. Therefore, MPSRF should be more widely applied to anterior pelvic ring fractures SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-021-02618-9. BioMed Central 2021-07-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8314600/ /pubmed/34315524 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-021-02618-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pan, Zhi-Hong
Chen, Fan-Cheng
Huang, Jun-Ming
Sun, Cheng-Yi
Ding, Sheng-Long
Modified pedicle screw-rod versus anterior subcutaneous internal pelvic fixation for unstable anterior pelvic ring fracture: a retrospective study and finite element analysis
title Modified pedicle screw-rod versus anterior subcutaneous internal pelvic fixation for unstable anterior pelvic ring fracture: a retrospective study and finite element analysis
title_full Modified pedicle screw-rod versus anterior subcutaneous internal pelvic fixation for unstable anterior pelvic ring fracture: a retrospective study and finite element analysis
title_fullStr Modified pedicle screw-rod versus anterior subcutaneous internal pelvic fixation for unstable anterior pelvic ring fracture: a retrospective study and finite element analysis
title_full_unstemmed Modified pedicle screw-rod versus anterior subcutaneous internal pelvic fixation for unstable anterior pelvic ring fracture: a retrospective study and finite element analysis
title_short Modified pedicle screw-rod versus anterior subcutaneous internal pelvic fixation for unstable anterior pelvic ring fracture: a retrospective study and finite element analysis
title_sort modified pedicle screw-rod versus anterior subcutaneous internal pelvic fixation for unstable anterior pelvic ring fracture: a retrospective study and finite element analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8314600/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34315524
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-021-02618-9
work_keys_str_mv AT panzhihong modifiedpediclescrewrodversusanteriorsubcutaneousinternalpelvicfixationforunstableanteriorpelvicringfracturearetrospectivestudyandfiniteelementanalysis
AT chenfancheng modifiedpediclescrewrodversusanteriorsubcutaneousinternalpelvicfixationforunstableanteriorpelvicringfracturearetrospectivestudyandfiniteelementanalysis
AT huangjunming modifiedpediclescrewrodversusanteriorsubcutaneousinternalpelvicfixationforunstableanteriorpelvicringfracturearetrospectivestudyandfiniteelementanalysis
AT sunchengyi modifiedpediclescrewrodversusanteriorsubcutaneousinternalpelvicfixationforunstableanteriorpelvicringfracturearetrospectivestudyandfiniteelementanalysis
AT dingshenglong modifiedpediclescrewrodversusanteriorsubcutaneousinternalpelvicfixationforunstableanteriorpelvicringfracturearetrospectivestudyandfiniteelementanalysis