Concomitant hip and distal radius fractures

Lin, Yi-Pin; Hung, Shih-Hsin; Su, Yu‐Ping; Feng, Chi-Kuang; Liu, Chien‐Liang; Chiu, Fang-Yao

doi:10.1016/j.jcma.2014.12.005

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, for concomitant injuries in other body regions it could only be shown that these usually lead to a longer hospital stay, which is associated with a higher mortality rate in elderly patients in particular. Generally, this had no influence on the outcome of the examined injury [44, 45]. In contrast, in our study, the concomitant injuries, secondary to the reduction result, showed a negative influence on four of the evaluated outcome parameters.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 80%

Influence of reduction quality on functional outcome and quality of life in treatment of tibial plafond fractures: a retrospective cohort study

Privalov

Euler

Keil

et al. 2019

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of reduction quality, using intraoperative 3D imaging, on quality of life and functional outcome in the operative treatment of tibial plafond fractures.MethodsA group of patients with tibial plafond fractures was re-examined. The operative treatment was performed between September 2001 and October 2011. The follow-up examination was at least 2 years after the final surgical procedure. Final reduction result was assessed intraoperatively using a mobile 3D C-arm. A categorization with regard to descriptive parameters as well as type and size of joint surface irregularities was performed. Follow-up results were evaluated using: Olerud and Molander (O & M) score, Short-Form-36 (SF-36) score, movement deficit, Kellgren and Lawrence grade of osteoarthritis, and pain intensity.Results34 patients with operatively treated tibial plafond fracture could be re-examined. Reduction quality had the greatest influence on functional result measured by the O & M score (p = 0.001) and the PCS domain of the SF-36 score (p = 0.018).Significant differences with regard to O & M score (p = 0.000), SF-36 score (p = 0.001 to p = 0.02; without MCS domain), movement deficit (p = 0.001), grade of osteoarthritis (p = 0.005) and pain (p = 0.001) could be verified under consideration of the reduction quality. The group with the anatomically more accurate reduction also showed a better result for clinical follow-up and quality of life. Furthermore, it is not the type of joint surface irregularity that is always decisive, but rather the size.ConclusionsDespite other relevant factors, it appears that reduction quality –which can be analyzed with intraoperative 3D imaging– plays the most important role in postoperative quality of life and functional outcome. Corrections should therefore be performed on joint surface irregularities with a size above 2 mm.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 80%