| Literature DB >> 24967126 |
Mohammad Ali Tahririan1, Seyyed Hamid Mousavitadi1, Mohsen Derakhshan1.
Abstract
Fixation of tibial plateau fractures with plate has been widely used. This prospective study was planned to compare locking plate fixation of tibial plateau fracture with nonlocking methods in terms of their functional outcomes. The subjects of the study were selected from consecutive patients suffering from tibial plateau fractures referred to Kashani Hospital in Isfahan, Iran, between 2012 and 2013 and were candidate for surgery. The final included patients were assigned to two groups, those who were treated with locking plate (n = 20) and those who were treated with nonlocking plates (N = 21). The mean duration of follow-up was 13.4 months (ranging between 10 and 17 months). The mean of knee scores was significantly higher in locking plate group than in nonlocking plate group at the follow-up time (80.20 ± 10.21 versus 72.52 ± 14.75, P = 0.039). Also, the mean VAS pain severity score was significantly lower in locking plate group compared with nonlocking plate group (4.45 ± 2.50 versus 6.00 ± 2.59, P = 0.046). This study confirmed superiority of the locking plate method over nonlocking plate method with regard to knee score as well as VAS pain score.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24967126 PMCID: PMC4045368 DOI: 10.1155/2014/324573
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ISRN Orthop ISSN: 2090-6161
Figure 1Flowchart of trial.
Type of fractures and common mechanisms of the fracture.
| Type of fracture | Nonlocking | Locking | Mean age | Common mechanism |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schatzker system | ||||
| Grade I | 2 (9.5)* | 0 (0.0)* | 31.00 ± 11.31 | MA (50.0)/F (50.0) |
| Grade II | 11 (52.4) | 9 (45.0) | 34.37 ± 9.45 | MA (35.0)/PTCA (20.0) |
| Grade III | 2 (9.5) | 1 (5.0) | 28.00 ± 4.00 | MTCA (66.7)/MA (33.3) |
| Grade IV | 1 (4.8) | 2 (10.0) | 33.00 ± 15.13 | MTCA (33.3)/MA (33.3) |
| Grade V | 1 (4.8) | 3 (15.0) | 36.50 ± 7.77 | MTCA (50.0)/MA (25.0) |
| Grade VI | 4 (19.0) | 5 (25.0) | 37.44 ± 8.41 | MA (66.7)/MTCA (11.1) |
| AO system | ||||
| B1 | 2 (9.5) | 0 (0.0) | 31.00 ± 11.31 | MA (50.0)/F (50.0) |
| B2 | 10 (47.0) | 6 (30.0) | 33.25 ± 6.35 | MA (31.3)/MTCA (18.8) |
| B3 | 6 (28.6) | 5 (25.0) | 33.60 ± 11.42 | MA (45.5)/MTCA (27.3) |
| C1 | 1 (4.8) | 4 (20.0) | 34.60 ± 4.63 | MA (40.0)/MTCA (40.0) |
| C2 | 2 (9.5) | 4 (20.0) | 40.66 ± 9.95 | MA (50.0)/MTCA (16.7) |
| C3 | 0 (0.0) | 1 (5.0) | 34.00 ± 0.00 | MA (100) |
MA: motor accident; MTCA: motor to car accident.
Data are presented as number (%).
*Analyses were performed using the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test (all P values were more than 0.05).
Figure 2Schatzker classification in two locking and nonlocking groups.
Figure 3AO classification in two locking and nonlocking groups.
Postoperative step-off and widening status by fracture systems.
| Type of fracture | Locking methods | Nonlocking methods | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Step-off >2 mm | Widening >2 mm | Step-off >2 mm | Widening >2 mm | |
| Schatzker system | ||||
| Grade I | 0 (0.0)* | 0 (0.0)* | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| Grade II | 2 (22.2) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (45.5) | 2 (18.2) |
| Grade III | 1 (100) | 1 (100) | 1 (50.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| Grade IV | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (100) |
| Grade V | 1 (33.3) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (100) |
| Grade VI | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (25.0) | 0 (0.0) |
|
| 0.191 | 0.682 | 0.684 | 0.748 |
| AO system | ||||
| B1 | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| B2 | 1 (16.7) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (20.0) | 1 (10.0) |
| B3 | 1 (20.0) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (83.3) | 2 (3.3) |
| C1 | 1 (25.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (100) |
| C2 | 1 (25.0) | 1 (25.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| C3 | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
|
| 0.981 | 0.378 | 0.667 | 0.164 |
Data are presented as number (%).
*Analyses were performed using the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test (all P values were more than 0.05).
Figure 4Frequency of knee score grades in two locking and nonlocking groups.
Correlation of pre- and postoperative step-off and widening with three parameters of VAS pain score, knee score, and ROM.
| VAS | Knee score | ROM | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Step-off | 0.309 | −0.242 | −0.290 |
|
| |||
| Step-off | 0.375 | −0.390 | −0.361 |
|
| |||
| Widening | 0.375 | −0.279 | −0.284 |
|
| |||
| Widening (after) | 0.383 | −0.341 | −0.444 |
VAS: visual analogue scale; ROM: range of motion.
Data are presented as r-coefficient (P value).
*Analyses were performed using Pearson's correlation test.
The relationship between postoperative step-off and widening and the level of knee score.
| Level of knee score | Step-off | Widening |
|---|---|---|
| Step-off | <2 mm | >2 mm |
| Excellent | 18 (60.0) | 2 (18.2) |
| Good | 10 (33.3) | 7 (63.6) |
| Poor | 2 (6.7) | 2 (18.2) |
|
|
| |
|
| ||
| Widening | <2 mm | >2 mm |
| Excellent | 20 (55.6) | 0 (0.0) |
| Good | 13 (36.1) | 4 (80.0) |
| Poor | 3 (8.3) | 1 (20.0) |
|
|
| |