| Literature DB >> 30215099 |
Christian von Rüden1,2,3, Lisa Wenzel4, Johannes Becker4, Andreas Thannheimer4, Peter Augat5,6, Alexander Woltmann4, Volker Bühren4, Mario Perl4.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Aim of this retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was to evaluate the functional mid-term outcome two years after open reduction and internal fixation of acetabular fractures involving the anterior column with affection of the quadrilateral plate using the pararectus approach on a large cohort.Entities:
Keywords: Acetabular fracture; Ilioinguinal approach; Lower extremity functional scale; Merle d’Aubigné; Outcome; Pararectus approach; Quadrilateral plate; SF-36; Stoppa approach; WOMAC
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30215099 PMCID: PMC6525136 DOI: 10.1007/s00264-018-4148-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int Orthop ISSN: 0341-2695 Impact factor: 3.075
Fig. 1Both column acetabular fracture with dislocation of the quadrilateral plate and impaction of the acetabular dome
Fig. 2Surgical access using the pararectus approach: the incision (dotted line) starts cranially at the junction of the lateral and middle thirds of the line connecting the umbilicus with the anterior superior iliac spine. The incision ends at the border between the middle and medial thirds of the line connecting the anterior superior iliac spine with the symphysis. If necessary, an extension of the incision is possible (extended dotted line)
Fig. 3Retraction of mobilized external iliac vessels (A) provides optimal visualization of the pelvic brim and the quadrilateral plate (B). The direct intraoperative view into the fracture gap (C) facilitates anatomical fracture reduction
Fig. 4Post-operative X-ray demonstrates the fracture reduced anatomically using a small fragment plate (Stryker PRO system, Stryker Corp., Kalamazoo, MI, USA) on the pelvic brim and quadrilateral plate without any step or gap
Patients’ demographic and peri-operative data overview
| Parameter | Value | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Male | 40 | 64.5 |
| Female | 12 | 35.5 |
| Age* [years] | 55 (18–90) | |
| Age > 60 years | 23 | 44.2 |
| Mechanism of injury | ||
| Car accident | 13 | 25 |
| Motor bike accident | 4 | 7.7 |
| Bicycle accident | 8 | 15.4 |
| Fall > 3 m | 5 | 9.6 |
| Fall < 3 m | 18 | 34.6 |
| Base jump accident | 1 | 1.9 |
| Skiing accident | 3 | 5.8 |
| Monotrauma | 22 | 42.3 |
| Polytrauma | 30 | 57.7 |
| Judet and Letournel classification | ||
| Both column | 22 | 42.4 |
| Anterior column | 6 | 11.5 |
| Transverse | 2 | 3.8 |
| Anterior column posterior hemitransverse | 16 | 30.8 |
| T-shaped | 6 | 11.5 |
| Delay to surgery* [days] | 3 (0–19) | |
| Operation time* [minutes] | 140 (60–240) | |
| Duration of hospital treatment* [days] | 19 (7–38) | |
*Results are presented as median
Post-operative complications
| Complication | Patients [ |
|---|---|
| Subcutaneous hematoma | 1 |
| Superficial wound infection | 1 |
| Obturator nerve affection | 1 |
| Pelvic deep vein thrombosis | 2 |
| Implant breakage | 1 |
Functional results according to Lower Extremity Functional Scale, modified Merle d’Aubigné score, WOMAC, and SF-36 24 months post-operatively in 34 patients
| Score | Results |
|---|---|
| Lower Extremity Functional Scale* | 68 points (range 39–80) |
| WOMAC** | 6% (± 14.5) |
| SF-36** | 69% (± 20.1) |
| Modified Merle d’Aubigné score* | 16 points (range 13–18) |
| Excellent (18 points): 22 patients (65%) | |
| Good (15–17 points): 8 patients (23.5%) | |
| Fair (14 or 13 points): 4 patients (11.5%) |
*Median; **Mean +/SD