| Literature DB >> 31072333 |
Ye Peng1, Jianheng Liu1, Gongzi Zhang1, Xinran Ji1, Wei Zhang1, Lihai Zhang2, Peifu Tang3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery has become popular because of the lower incidence of wound complications. However, achieving an anatomic reduction that provides a satisfactory outcome is difficult using minimally invasive surgery. Our study aimed to evaluate the reduction and clinical outcomes of closed reduction and percutaneous fixation treatment using a closed reduction traction device for displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures compared with traditional open reduction plate fixation using an extended lateral approach.Entities:
Keywords: Calcaneus fracture; Minimally invasive; Percutaneous fixation
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31072333 PMCID: PMC6507023 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-019-1162-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Fig. 1Two types of closed reduction devices and the closed reduction technique. a Two-point traction device (a: calcaneal tuberosity, b: talus neck). b Three-point traction device (a: calcaneal tuberosity, b: cuboid, c: tibia). c Axial traction for length reduction. d Compression by fists for width reduction. e Unilateral or bilateral traction for varus and valgus angle reduction
Patient characteristics
| ORPF | CRPF | |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | 4 females/20 males | 2 females/19 males |
| Age, years | 39.2 (range, 16–65) | 40.8 (range, 23–60) |
| Smoker, | 7/24 (29.2%) | 5/21 (24%) |
| Diabetes, | 2/24 (8.3%) | 1/21 (4.7%) |
| Sanders classification | 11 type II/10 type III/3 type IV | 12 type II/7 type III/2 type IV |
| Surgery time | 87.00 ± 9.78 min | 85.86 ± 11.17 min |
Fig. 2Case 1: A 40-year-old male with diabetes and severe soft tissue injury. X-ray (a, c) showing the lateral view of the calcaneus fracture before and after closed reduction percutaneous fixation surgery. The Bohler’s angle (red line) was reduced from − 3 to 28°. CT scan (b) showing a comminuted fracture in the articular surface (Sanders type IV). Bad soft tissue situation of calcaneous skin (d)
Fig. 3Case 2: A 38-year-old male who was a smoker with bilateral calcaneus fractures. X-ray lateral view (a) and CT scan (b) showing severe compression of the subtalar joint articular surface. Lateral view (c) after surgery showing satisfactory reduction and percutaneous fixations of the calcaneus fracture
Fig. 4a–d Reduction of the depressed articular surface through the created bone tunnel with a curved smooth periosteal elevator. Before reduction (a). After reduction (b). Subtalar joint articular surface (red arrow). Depressed subtalar joint articular surface (blue arrow). Large bone defect after reduction (blue circle). Before reduction (c). After reduction (d)
Fig. 5Calcium phosphate cement was injected through the bone tunnel to fill the bone defect space and increase the primary stability
Reduction radiographic parameters
| ORPF | CRPF |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length before surgery | 7.96 ± 0.70 (cm) | 8.52 ± 0.80 (cm) | – |
| Length after surgery | 7.48 ± 0.61 (cm) | 7.91 ± 0.69 (cm) | 0.8764 |
| Width before surgery | 4.60 ± 0.48 (cm) | 4.24 ± 0.52 (cm) | – |
| Width after surgery | 3.93 ± 0.46 (cm) | 3.84 ± 0.48 (cm) | 0.5245 |
| Height before surgery | 4.05 ± 0.59 (cm) | 4.05 ± 0.36 (cm) | – |
| Height after surgery | 4.09 ± 0.51 (cm) | 4.21 ± 0.56 (cm) | 0.4560 |
| Bohler’s angle before surgery | 1.60 ± 25.94 ° | 1.63 ± 13.55° | – |
| Bohler’s angle after surgery | 19.97 ± 9.48° | 21.70 ± 10.33° | 0.5611 |
| Gissane’s angle before surgery | 118.57 ± 12.21° | 122.10 ± 14.95° | – |
| Gissane’s angle after surgery | 116.51 ± 10.61° | 120.18 ± 16.76° | 0.3789 |
| Varus (+) or valgus (−) before surgery | 1.81 ± 4.20° | 3.30 ± 5.17° | – |
| Varus (+) or valgus (−) after surgery | 1.52 ± 2.35° | 1.41 ± 1.59° | 0.8571 |
Outcome assessments
| ORIF | CRPF |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| AOFAS hindfoot score | 80.29 ± 6.15 | 83.62 ± 6.95 | |
| VAS postoperatively | 1.50 ± 1.22 | 0.81 ± 0.87 | |
| Complication rate | 20.8% | 4.8% | |
| Length of hospital stay | 9.63 ± 2.72 days | 6.71 ± 1.85 days |
*P < 0.05