Objective: To examine the influence of sacroiliac joint reduction quality on the clinical effect of bionic reduction and internal fixation for pelvic ring injury. Methods: From January 2014 to February 2019,the clinical data of 78 patients diagnosed with pelvic ring injury involving sacroiliac joints and treated with bionic reduction and internal fixation at Honghui Hospital Affiliated to Medical College of Xi'an Jiaotong University were retrospectively analyzed.There were 48 males and 30 females,aged (48.3±8.3)years (range:28 to 68 years).After bionic reduction and internal fixation,the patients were grouped according to the maximum displacement distance (d) of sacroiliac joint residual on the damaged side measured by CT examination. Patients with d≤5 mm were included in anatomical bionic reduction group,and patients with d>5 mm were included in non-anatomical bionic reduction group.In non-anatomical bionic reduction group,according to the direction of residual displacement,the patients were divided into separation displacement group and anterior-posterior displacement group. The X-ray examination was performed immediately and at the last follow-up after operation.If sacroiliac joint was relocated,or internal plant loosening,displacement,fracture and re-displacement of fracture,it was defined as internal fixation failure.Majeed pelvic fracture scoring system was used to evaluate the postoperative functional status of the two groups,and visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the postoperative pain.Comparison between groups was performed by completely random design ANOVA,χ2 test,Fisher's exact test,Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis H test. Results: According to the CT examination,28 cases were included in anatomical bionic reduction group,and 50 cases were included in non-anatomical bionic reduction group.In non-anatomical bionic reduction group,27 cases were divided into separation displacement group and 23 cases were in anterior-posterior displacement group.There was no significant difference in general data among anatomical bionic reduction group,separation displacement group and anterior-posterior displacement group (P>0.05). The follow-up time was (37.8±6.6) months (range:25 to 51 months). At the last follow up,the excellent and good rate of Majeed score in anatomical bionic reduction group was 96.4%(27/28),which was better than that in separation displacement group(74.1%(20/27)) and anterior-posterior displacement group (30.4%(7/23)),the difference was statistically significant (Z=-6.479,P<0.01;Z=-6.256,P<0.01); and the good rate of the separation displacement group was better than that of the anterior-posterior displacement group(Z=-3.607,P<0.01).The VAS of anatomical bionic reduction group (17 cases with 0 point, 11 cases with 1 to 3 points) were lower than that of the displacement group (6 cases with 0 point,16 cases with 1 to 3 points,5 cases with 4 to 6 points) and anterior-posterior displacement group (3 cases with 0 point,7 cases with 1 to 3 points,13 cases with 4 to 6 points),the difference was statistically significant (Z=-3.515,P<0.01;Z=-3.506,P<0.01),and there was no difference between separation displacement group and anterior-posterior displacement group.Total of 8 cases of internal fixation failure occurred,and the failure rate of anatomical bionic reduction group (0,0/28) was lower than that of the separation displacement group (11.1%,3/27) and anterior-posterior displacement group (21.7%,5/23) (P=0.111,P=0.014),and there was no difference between separation displacement group and anterior-posterior displacement group(P=0.444). Conclusions: In the bionic reduction and internal fixation of pelvic fracture involving sacroiliac joint injury,the functional status,pain and internal fixation failure rate of patients with anatomical bionic reduction of sacroiliac joint are significantly better than those in the non-anatomical bionic reduction.The functional recovery of patients with separation displacement is better than that of the patients with anterior and posterior displacement.
目的： 探讨骶髂关节复位质量对骨盆环损伤仿生复位内固定术的临床效果的影响。 方法： 回顾性分析2014年1月至2019年2月于西安交通大学医学院附属红会医院确诊为累及骶髂关节的骨盆环损伤，且行仿生复位内固定术治疗的78例患者的临床资料。男性48例，女性30例，年龄（48.3±8.3）岁（范围：28~68岁）。患者在行仿生复位内固定术后，以术后即刻CT检查图像测量的受损侧骶髂关节残余移位最大距离作为分组依据，≤5 mm者纳入解剖仿生复位组，>5 mm纳入非解剖仿生复位组；非解剖仿生复位组中，根据残余移位的方向，再将其分为分离移位组、前后移位组。患者术后即刻和末次随访时拍摄X线片，若出现骶髂关节再移位或内植物松动、移位、断裂及骨折再移位等情况，即定义为内固定失效。采用Majeed骨盆骨折评分系统评估患者术后的功能状态，视觉模拟评分（VAS）评估其疼痛程度。组间比较采用完全随机设计方差分析、χ²检验、Fisher确切概率法、Mann-Whitney U检验和Kruskal-Wallis H检验。 结果： 根据患者术后CT图像测量结果，解剖仿生复位组28例，非解剖仿生复位组50例；非解剖仿生复位组中，分离移位组27例，前后移位组23例。解剖仿生复位组、分离移位组、前后移位组间患者的一般资料的差异均无统计学意义（P值均>0.05）。患者术后随访（37.8±6.6）个月（范围：25~51个月）。末次随访时，解剖仿生复位组患者术后Majeed评分优良率为96.4%（27/28），分离移位组为74.1%（20/27），前后移位组为30.4%（7/23）；解剖仿生复位组优良率优于分离移位组和前后移位组（Z=-6.479，P<0.01；Z=-6.256，P<0.01），分离移位组优良率优于前后移位组（Z=-3.607，P<0.01）。解剖仿生复位组患者VAS为0分17例，1~3分11例；分离移位组为0分6例，1~3分16例，4~6分5例；前后移位组为0分3例，1~3分7例，4~6分13例；解剖仿生复位组VAS低于分离移位组和前后移位组（Z=-3.515，P<0.01；Z=-3.506，P<0.01），分离移位组与前后移位组的差异无统计学意义（Z=-1.813，P=0.070）。共8例患者发生内固定失效，解剖仿生复位组失效率为0（0/28），分离移位组为11.1%（3/27），前后移位组为21.7%（5/23）；解剖仿生复位组与前后移位组的差异有统计学意义（P=0.014），与分离移位组的差异无统计学意义（P=0.111），前后移位组与分离移位组的差异无统计学意义（P=0.444）。 结论： 累及骶髂关节损伤的骨盆骨折患者行仿生复位内固定术后，骶髂关节解剖仿生复位患者的功能状态、疼痛情况、内固定失效率明显优于非解剖仿生复位患者。分离移位患者术后功能恢复优于前后移位患者。.