tjcl

Turkish Journal of Clinics and Laboratory

2149-8296

DNT Ortadoğu Yayıncılık A.Ş.

10.18663/tjcl.439538

Health Care Administration

Sağlık Kurumları Yönetimi

İzole ulna cisim kırıklarında konservatif ve cerrahi tedavi yöntemlerinin karşılaştırılması

Comparison of conservative and surgical treatment methods in isolated ulna shaft fractures

Tolunay

Tolga

GAZİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, TIP FAKÜLTESİ Akkurt

Mehmet Orçun

Yenimahalle Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi

09 30 2018

9 3 199 204 07 01 2018 07 16 2018

2010

Turkish Journal of Clinics and Laboratory

Amaç: İzole ulna cisim kırıklarınıntedavisinde hem konservatif hem de cerrahi metodlar önerilmiştir. Çalışmanın amacı izole ulna cisim kırıklarının optimaltedavisini ve kırık iyileşmesini etkileyen faktörleri araştırmaktır.Gereç ve Yöntemler: Çalışmaya2013-2016 yılları arasında hastanemize başvurmuş izole ulna cisim kırıklı 43hasta alındı. Hastalar konservatif tedavi edilen ve cerrahi olarak tedaviedilen olmak üzere 2 grupta incelendi. Sonuçların değerlendirilmesinde eklemhareket açıklığı, kavrama gücü, fonksiyonel ve radyolojik sonuçlar kullanıldı. Ağrı vizuel analog skala (VAS) iledeğerlendirildi. Kavrama gücüne ise el dinamometresiyle hasta otururken vedirsek 90 derece fleksiyonda bakıldı. Fonksiyonel sonuçlara kol, omuz elsorunları skorlaması (DASH Skoru) ile bakıldı. Bulgular: Konservatiftedavi edilen grupta 23 hasta, cerrahi tedavi edilen grupta 20 hastabulunmaktaydı. Her 2 gruparasında yaş, cinsiyet dağılımı, kırıkpaterni, yaralanma mekanizması ve kırık lokasyonu açısından fark saptanmadı.Her 2 grup arasında VAS skoru, kavrama gücü, DASH skoru ve kaynama açısından dafark saptanmadı. Konservatif tedavi edilen grupta kaynama süresi ortalama12±1,04 haftayken cerrahi olarak tedavi edilen grupta kaynama süresi ortalama17±1,16 haftaydı (p=0,586). Her 2 grup arasında dirsek ve el bileği eklemhareket açıklığı ve komplikasyonlar açısından da fark saptanmadı.Sonuç: Çalışmamızdacerrahi olarak tedavi edilen hastaların konservatif olarak tedavi edilenhastalardan fonksiyonel ve klinik olarak daha iyi sonuçlara sahip olmadığı vekonservatif tedavi yöntemlerinin sonuçlarının başarılı olduğunu saptandı. İzoleulna cisim kırıkları tedavi yönteminin belirlenmesinde prospektif, çok merkezlive daha geniş hasta serilerini kapsayan çalışmalara ihtiyaç vardır.

Aim: Conservative and surgical treatment options havebeen suggested for the treatment of isolated ulna shaft fractures. The aim thestudy is to research the optimal treatment option for isolated ulna fracturesand factors affecting the fracture healing.Material and Methods: The study included 43 patients who applied to ourhospital in 2013-2016 with isolated ulna shaft fractures. Patients were dividedinto two groups: conservative treatment and surgical treatment. Joint range ofmotion, grip strength, functional and radiologic results were used for evaluatingthe results. Pain was evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS). Grip strengthwas measured with a hand dynamometer while the patient was sitting and elbowwas in 90-degree flexion. Functional tests were evaluated with the Disabilitiesof the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score (DASH Score).Results: 23 patients were in the conservative treatment group and 20 patientswere included in the surgical intervention group. No difference was observed interms of VAS score, grip strength, DASH score and bone union. Average boneunion times for the two groups were as following: conservative treatment group,12±1.04 weeks; surgical treatment group, 17±1.16 weeks (p=0,586). No differencewas observed between the groups in terms of hand wrist joint range of motionand complications.Conclusion: Our study showed thatpatients who were treated by surgical intervention had no functional andclinical superiority to patients with conservative treatment. There is a needfor prospective and multicentre studies comprising a larger series of patientsfor defining the methodology for isolated ulna shaft fractures.

İzole ulna cisim kırığı konservatif tedavi cerrahi tedavi

isolated ulnna shaft fracture conservative treatment surgical treatment

1. Handoll HH, Pearce P. Interventions for treating isolated diaphyseal fractures of the ulna in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 13: CD000523. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000523.pub4. Review.

2. Atkin DM, Bohay DR, Slabaugh P, Smith BW. Treatment of ulnar shaft fractures: a prospective, randomized study. Orthopedics 1995; 18: 543–47.

3. Corea JR, Brakenbury PH, Blakemore ME. The treatment of isolated fractures of the ulnar shaft in adults. Injury 1981; 12: 365-70.

4. Du Toit FP, Grabe RP. Isolated fractures of the shaft of the ulna. S Afr Med J 1979; 56: 21-5.

5. Sarmiento A, Latta LL, Zych G, McKeever P, Zagorski JP. Isolated ulnar shaft fractures treated with functional braces. J Orthop Trauma 1998; 12: 420-24.

6. Pollock FH, Pankovich AM, Prieto JJ, Lorenz M. The isolated ulnar shaft fracture: treatment without immobilization. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1983; 65: 339-42.

7. Chapman MW, Gordon JE, Zissimos AG. Compression plate fixation of acute fractures of the diaphyses of the radius and ulna. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1989; 71: 159-69.

8. Boriani S, Lefevre C, Malingue E, Bettelli G. The Lefevre ulnar nail. Chir Organi Mov 1991; 76: 151-55.

9. Gebuhr P, Hölmich P, Orsnes T, Soelberg M, Krasheninnikoff M, Kjersgaard AG. Isolated ulnar shaft fractures: comparison of treatment by a functional brace and long-arm cast. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1992; 74: 757–59.

10. Coulibaly MO, Jones CB, Sietsema DL, Schildhauer TA. Results of 70 consecutive ulnar night stick fractures. Injury 2015; 46: 1359–66.

11. Stern PJ, Drury WJ. Complications of plate fixation of forearm fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1983; 175: 25–29

12. Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand). Am J Ind Med 1996; 29: 602- 8

13. Szabo RM, Skinner M. Isolated ulnar shaft fractures: retrospective study of 46 cases. Acta Orthop Scand 1990; 61: 350-52.

14. Dymond IW. The treatment of isolated fractures of the distal ulna. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1984; 66: 408-10.

15. Van Leemput T, Mahieu G. Conservative management of minimally displaced isolated fractures of the ulnar shaft. Acta Orthop Belg 2007; 73: 710–13.

16. Mackay D, Wood L, Rangan A. The treatment of isolated ulnar fractures in adults: a systematic review. Injury 2000; 31: 565–70.

17. Zych GA, Latta LL, Zagorski JB. Treatment of isolated ulnar shaft fractures with prefabricated functional fracture braces. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1987; 219: 194-200.

18. Saka G,Saglam N,Kurtulmus T,Avcı CC,Akpınar F,Kovacı H,Celik A .New interlocking intramedullary radius and ulna nails for treating forearm diaphyseal fractures in adults: A retrospective study. Injury 2014; 45: 16-23.

19. Leung F, Chow SP. A prospective, randomized trial comparing the limited contact dynamic compression plate with the point contact fixator for forearm fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 8: 2343-48.