Efficacy comparison between modified two-window iliofemoral approach and ilioinguinal approach for reduction and internal fixation of composite acetabular fracture / 中华创伤杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective:To compare the effect of reduction and internal fixation of composite acetabular fracture with the modified two-window iliofemoral approach and ilioinguinal approach.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was used to analyze the clinical data of 160 patients with composite acetabular fracture admitted to First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from January 2016 to August 2021, including 117 males and 43 females, aged 15-78 years [(44.1±16.0)years]. According to the Letournel classification system, there were 101 patients with both-column fracture, 5 with anterior wall/column combined with posterior semi-transverse fracture and 24 with T-shaped fracture. A total of 80 patients were treated using the modified iliofemoral incision combined with limited Pfannstiel incision (modified two-window iliofemoral approach group) and the other 80 patients were treated using the ilioinguinal approach (ilioinguinal approach group). The fracture healing was observed. The operation time and intraoperative bleeding volume were compared between the two groups. The quality of fracture reduction was evaluated by Matta scoring standard at 1 day and 6 months after operation. The modified Merle d′Aubigne & Postel scoring standard was used to evaluate the function of the affected hip joint at the last follow-up. The incidence of complications such as neurovascular injury, iatrogenic bladder injury, heterotopic ossification and femoral head necrosis were compared between the two groups.Results:All patients were followed up for 12-78 months [(43.3±17.9)months], with bony union of the fracture. The operation time and intraoperative bleeding volume in modified two-window iliofemoral approach group were 150.0 (123.8, 180.0)minutes and 600.0 (500.0, 787.5)ml when compared to 190.0 (150.0, 240.0)minutes and 700.0 (562.5, 887.5)ml in ilioinguinal approach group (all P<0.01). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the quality of fracture reduction at 1 day and 6 months after operation, function of hip joint at the last follow-up and incidence of complications (all P>0.05). Conclusions:For reduction and internal fixation of composite acetabular fracture, the modified two-window iliofemoral approach has advantages over the ilioinguinal approach in reducing operation time and intraoperative bleeding, although both methods yield similar results in fracture reduction quality, postoperative hip function and complication rate.