论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较3D打印导板辅助微创技术与传统微创技术治疗Sanders Ⅱ型跟骨骨折的疗效。方法:回顾性分析2018年1月至2020年1月首都医科大学附属北京同仁医院足踝外科中心收治的74例Sanders Ⅱ型跟骨关节内骨折患者资料。根据治疗方式不同分为2组：38例患者采用3D打印导板辅助微创治疗（3D导板组），男22例，女16例；年龄（41.5±3.5）岁。36例患者采用传统微创技术治疗（传统微创组），男24例，女12例；年龄（40.3±7.2）岁。比较两组患者的手术时间、术中透视次数、美国足踝外科协会（AOFAS）的踝-后足评分、视觉模拟评分（VAS）、健康状况调查简表（SF-36）评分、B?hlers角、Gissane角、跟骨长度、跟骨宽度、跟骨高度及术后并发症。结果:两组患者术前一般资料比较差异均无统计学意义（n P>0.05），具有可比性。所有患者均获随访，时间（12.6±3.6）个月（6~24个月）。3D导板组的手术时间[（55.3±7.1）min]、术中透视次数[（8.1±2.6）次]少于传统微创组[（71.2±8.7）min、（21.2±8.7）次]，AOFAS的踝-后足评分（81.4±6.3）分高于传统微创组（77.9±6.2）分，差异均有统计学意义（n P0.05）。传统微创组患者4颗螺钉过长，可能撞击足内侧结构，3颗螺钉进入距下关节，3D导板组均无螺钉过长发生。n 结论:3D打印导板辅助微创技术治疗跟骨骨折，能减少手术时间、透视次数及潜在并发症，有助于提高Sanders Ⅱ型跟骨骨折治疗的疗效。“,”Objective:To compare minimally invasive treatment with versus without a 3D printed guide plate for Sanders type Ⅱ calcaneal fractures.Methods:A retrospective analysis was done of the 74 patients with Sanders type Ⅱ displaced intra-articular calcaneal fracture who had been treated at Foot and Ankle Surgery Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital Affiliated to Capital Medical University from January 2018 to January 2020. They were divided into 2 groups according to whether a 3D printed guide plate was used or not. In the 3D printing group of 38 patients treated by minimally invasive surgery assisted by a 3D printed guide plate, there were 22 males and 16 females with an age of (41.5±3.5) years; in the control group of 36 patients treated by traditional minimally invasive surgery, there were 24 males and 12 females with an age of (40.3±7.2) years. The 2 groups were compared in terms of operation time, intraoperative fluoroscopy, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, visual analog scale (VAS), Short Form 36 (SF-36), B?hler angle, Gissane angle, calcaneal length, width and height and postoperative complications.Results:There was no significant difference in the preoperative demographic data between the 2 groups, indicating comparability between groups (n P>0.05). All patients were available for a follow-up of (12.6±3.6) months (from 6 to 24 months) after surgery. The operation time [(55.3±7.1) min] and intraoperative fluoroscopy [(8.1±2.6) times] in the 3D printing group were significantly less than those in the control group [(71.2±8.7) min and (21.2±8.7) times] (n P<0.01) while the AOFAS score in the former group (81.4±6.3) was significantly higher than that in the latter (77.9±6.2) (n P0.05). In the control group, 4 screws were found to be too long with possible impingement on the medial structures of the foot, and 3 screws to penetrate the subtalar joint; in the 3D printing group, there were no too long or off-target screws in the sustentaculum tali.n Conclusion:The minimally invasive treatment of Sanders type Ⅱ calcaneal fractures assisted by a 3D printing guide plate can reduce operation time, intraoperative fluoroscopy and potential complications, improving the clinical efficacy.