Email Alert | RSS

北京大学学报（医学版） ›› 2020, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (2): 290-297. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2020.02.016

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

中青年股骨颈骨折内固定术后发生缺血性股骨头坏死的相关因素

刘冰川,孙川,邢永,周方,田耘(),姬洪全,张志山,郭琰,吕扬,杨钟玮,侯国进,高山   

  1. 北京大学第三医院骨科,北京 100191
  • 收稿日期:2019-01-06 出版日期:2020-04-18 发布日期:2020-04-18
  • 通讯作者: 田耘 E-mail:tiany@bjmu.edu.cn

Analysis of risk factors for necrosis of femoral head after internal fixation surgery in young and mid-aged patients with femoral neck fracture

Bing-chuan LIU,Chuan SUN,Yong XING,Fang ZHOU,Yun TIAN(),Hong-quan JI,Zhi-shan ZHANG,Yan GUO,Yang LV,Zhong-wei YANG,Guo-jin HOU,Shan GAO   

  1. Department of Orthopedics, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China
  • Received:2019-01-06 Online:2020-04-18 Published:2020-04-18
  • Contact: Yun TIAN E-mail:tiany@bjmu.edu.cn

RICH HTML

   

PDF (PC)

摘要：

目的 通过回顾性研究分析中青年股骨颈骨折患者内固定术后发生缺血性股骨头坏死(avascular necrosis of femoral head, ANFH)的危险因素.方法: 对北京大学第三医院2007年1月至2017年12月期间采用骨折复位内固定术治疗的中青年(18~60岁)股骨颈骨折患者进行回顾性研究.记录患者的性别,年龄,体重指数(body mass index, BMI),美国麻醉协会分级(American Society of Anesthesiology,ASA),受伤原因,骨折侧别,受伤至手术间隔时间,骨折线部位,Garden分型,Pauwels分型,复位方式(切开或闭合),内固定方式及复位质量等资料.依据患者随访的X线及MRI影像资料明确ANFH的诊断.内固定方式采用空心加压螺钉(cannulated compression screw, CCS)或动力髋螺钉(dynamic hip screw, DHS,加或不加抗旋转螺钉).采用单因素卡方检验及Logistic回归方程分析各因素与术后发生ANFH的相关性.结果: 纳入研究的患者共113例,包括男性63例,女性50例,平均年龄(43.17±12.34)岁,平均随访时间(25.08±16.17)个月.ASA分级包括Ⅰ级21例,Ⅱ级55例和Ⅲ级37例.受伤原因包括低能量创伤76例及高能量创伤37例.骨折侧别包括左侧61例,右侧52例.骨折线部位包括头下型37例,经颈型74例及基底型2例.Garden分型包括Ⅰ型3例,Ⅱ型46例,Ⅲ型39例及Ⅳ型25例.Pauwels分型包括Ⅰ型21例,Ⅱ型55例及Ⅲ型37例.患者受伤至手术间隔时间为(3.88±3.66) d,采用闭合及切开复位的患者分别有108例及5例,内固定采用CCS的患者63例,DHS的患者50例.骨折复位质量包括A级91例,B级18例,C级4例.术后共发生ANFH 18例,发生率为15.93%(18/113).单因素卡方检验结果显示受伤原因(OR=0.19, P < 0.01),Garden分型(OR=0.13, P < 0.01),Pauwels分型(OR=0.12, P = 0.02),内固定方式(OR=3.29, P = 0.04)及骨折复位质量(OR=0.33, P < 0.01)等5种因素与术后ANFH有显著相关性, 将这5种因素进一步纳入Logistic回归方程,结果显示受伤原因(OR=4.11, P = 0.03)与Garden分型(OR=4.85, P = 0.04)与术后ANFH有显著相关性.结论: 受伤原因,Garden分型,Pauwels分型,内固定方式及骨折复位质量等因素会增加中青年股骨颈骨折患者复位内固定术后发生ANFH的风险,其中受伤原因和骨折Garden分型的相关性更加显著.

关键词: 股骨颈骨折, 股骨头坏死, 危险因素

Abstract:

Objective: To retrospectively analyze the risk factors of avascular necrosis of femoral head (ANFH) after internal fixation in young and mid-aged adults.Methods: From January 2007 to December 2017, femoral neck fracture patients (18-60 years old) treated by reduction and internal fixation were retrospectively studied in Peking University Third Hospital. We recorded their gender, age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) grade, reason of injury, fracture side, interval between injury and surgery, location of fracture line, Garden classification, Pauwels classification, reduction method (open or closed), internal fixation and reduction quality. The diagnosis of ANFH was confirmed based on X-ray and MRI images during the follow-up. The internal fixation method inclu-ded cannulated compression screw (CCS) or dynamic hip screw (DHS, with or without anti-rotation screw). χ 2 test and Logistic regression analysis were used to analyze the relationship between the various factors and postoperative ANFH. Results: A total of 113 patients were included in this study, including 63 males and 50 females with an average age of (43.17 ± 12.34) years. They were followed up by (25.08 ± 16.17) months. ASA grade included grade Ⅰ (21 cases), grade Ⅱ (55 cases) and grade Ⅲ (37 cases). The reasons of injury included low-energy trauma (76 cases) and high-energy (37 cases). The fracture line included subcapital type (37 cases), transverse type (74 cases) and basal type (2 cases). Garden classification included type Ⅰ (3 cases), type Ⅱ (46 cases), type Ⅲ (39 cases) and type Ⅳ (25 cases). Pauwels classification included type Ⅰ (21 cases), type Ⅱ (55 cases) and type Ⅲ (37 cases). Interval between injury and surgery was (3.88 ± 3.66) days, 108 patients and 5 patients performed closed and open reduction respectively. 63 patients performed CCS, and 50 patients performed DHS. The reduction quality included grade A (91 cases), grade B (18 cases) and grade C (4 cases). 18 patients developed ANFH after surgery, the incidence rate was 15.93%(18/113). The result of χ 2 test showed the reason of injury (OR=0.19, P < 0.01), Garden classification (OR=0.13, P < 0.01), Pauwels classification (OR=0.12, P = 0.02), internal fixation method (OR=3.29, P = 0.04) and reduction quality (OR=0.33, P < 0.01) were significantly associated with ANFH. These five factors were further included into the Logistic regression analysis, and its results showed that the reason of injury (OR=4.11, P = 0.03) and Garden classification (OR=4.85, P = 0.04) were statistically significant. Conclusion: The reason of injury, Garden classification, Pauwels classification, internal fixation and reduction quality may increase the risk of ANFH after surgery, and the reason of injury and Garden classification were much more significant.

Key words: Femoral neck fracture, Necrosis of femoral head, Risk factors

中图分类号: 

  • R683.4

表1

股骨颈骨折复位质量分级"

Classification Angle of deviationa Neck-shaft angle
A < 15° 125° - 140°
B 15° - 30° 120° - 140° or 140° -150°
C > 30° <125° or >150°

表2

股骨颈骨折内固定术后发生股骨头坏死的单因素卡方检验"

Parameter Total(n=113) Necrosis(n=18) Non-necrosis(n=95) OR P value 95%CI
Gender 1.29 0.62 0.46, 3.64
Male 63 11 52
Female 50 7 43
Age/years 0.91 0.86 0.33, 2.57
< 40 46 7 39
40-60 67 11 56
BMI/(kg/m2) 0.69 0.53 0.22, 2.18
≤25 88 13 75
>25 25 5 20
ASA gradea 0.24
Ⅰ 21 1 20 0.16 0.06 0.02, 1.37
Ⅱ 55 9 46 0.71 0.52 0.25, 2.05
Ⅲ 37 8 29
Reason of fracture 0.19 <0.01 0.06, 0.55
Low-energy trauma 75 6 69
High-energy trauma 38 12 26
Interval between injury and surgery 1.09 0.86 0.39, 3.07
≤ 3 d 67 11 56
>3 d 46 7 39
Side of fracture 0.63 0.38 0.23, 1.75
Left 61 8 53
Right 52 10 42
Location of fracture lineb 0.71
Subcapital 37 7 30 1.07 0.50 0.98, 1.17
Transverse 74 11 63 1.03 0.56 0.99, 1.08
Basal 2 0 2
Garden classification 0.13 <0.01 0.03, 0.59
Ⅰ and Ⅱ 49 2 47
Ⅲ and Ⅳ 64 16 48
Pauwels classificationc 0.02
Ⅰ 21 1 20 0.12 0.02 0.01, 0.99
Ⅱ 55 6 49 0.29 0.02 0.10, 0.87
Ⅲ 37 11 26
Reduction method 0.75 0.80 0.08, 7.10
Closed 108 17 91
Open 5 1 4
Internal fixation 3.29 0.04 1.01, 10.71
CCS 63 14 49
DHS 50 4 46
Reduction qualityd <0.01
A 91 9 82 0.33 0.34 0.03, 3.51
B 18 8 10 2.40 0.47 0.21, 27.72
C 4 1 3

表3

股骨颈骨折内固定术后股骨头坏死危险因素的多因素Logistic回归分析"

Parameter OR P value 95%CI
Reason of fracture 4.11 0.03 1.19, 14.24
Garden classification 4.85 0.04 1.08, 21.75
Pauwels classificationa
Ⅰ vs. Ⅲ 1.95 0.57 0.19, 20.05
Ⅱ vs. Ⅲ 1.65 0.45 0.45, 6.08
Internal fixation 0.28 0.06 0.07, 1.06
Reduction qualityb
A vs. C 2.13 0.56 0.16, 27.59
B vs. C 0.29 0.37 0.02, 4.54

图1

典型病例,患者男,55岁,左股骨颈骨折"

图2

典型病例,患者男,50岁,右股骨颈骨折"

[1] Sprague S, Slobogean GP, Scott T , et al. Young femoral neck fractures: are we measuring outcomes that matter?[J] Injury, 2015,46(3):507-514.
[2] Rodriguez-Merchan EC, Gomez-Cardero P, Jimenez-Yuste V . Late avascular necrosis of the femoral head (anfh) after the percutaneous fixation of a non-displaced fracture of the femoral neck in a haemophilic patient with inhibitors: a non-reported association[J]. Haemophilia, 2012,18(1):e4-e5.
[3] Murphy DK, Randell T, Brennan KL , et al. Treatment and displacement affect the reoperation rate for femoral neck fracture[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2013,471(18):2691-2702.
[4] Schweitzer D, Melero P, Zylberberg A , et al. Factors associated with avascular necrosis of the femoral head and nonunion in patients younger than 65 years with displaced femoral neck fractures treated with reduction and internal fixation[J]. Eur J Orthopaedic Surg Traumatol, 2013,23(1):61-65.
[5] Damany DS, Parker MJ, Chojnowski A . Complications after intracapsular hip fractures in young adults: a meta-analysis of 18 published studies involving 564 fractures[J]. Injury, 2005,36(1):131-141.
[6] Stacey SC, Renninger CH, Hak D , et al. Tips and tricks for ORIF of displaced femoral neck fractures in the young adult patient[J]. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol, 2016,26(4):355-363.
[7] Zielinski SM, Meeuwis MA, Heetveld MH , et al. Adherence to a femoral neck fracture treatment guideline[J]. Int Orthop, 2013,37(7):1327-1334.
[8] Pauyo T, Drager J, Albers A , et al. Management of femoral neck fractures in the young patient: a critical analysis review[J]. World J Orthop, 2014,5(3):204-217.
[9] Bhandari M, Swiontkowski M . Management of acute hip fracture[J]. N Engl J Med, 2017,377(21):2053-2062.
[10] 曹发奇, 周武, 刘国辉 , 等. 股骨颈骨折复位内固定术后股骨头坏死的相关因素分析[J]. 中华骨科杂志, 2017,37(17):1088-1092.
[11] Wang T, Sun JY, Zha GC , et al. Analysis of risk factors for femoral head necrosis after internal fixation in femoral neck fractures[J]. Orthopedics, 2014,37(12):1117-1123.
[12] Zhao DW, Hu YC . Chinese experts' consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head in adults[J]. Orthop Surg, 2012,4(3):125-130.
[13] Slobogean GP, Sprague SA, Scott T , et al. Management of young femoral neck fracutures; is there a consensus[J]. Injury, 2015,43(3):435-440.
[14] Al-Ani AN, Neander G, Samuelsson B , et al. Risk factors for osteoporosis are common in young and middle-aged patients with femoral neck fractures regardless of trauma mechanism[J]. Acta Orthop, 2013,84(1):54-59.
[15] Slobogean GP, Sprague SA, Scott T , et al. Complications fol-lowing young femoral neck fractures[J]. Injury, 2015,46(3):484-491.
[16] Duckworth AD ,Bennet SJ,derinto JA, et al.Fixation of intracapsular fractures of the femoral neck in young patients[J]. J Bone Joint Surg, 2011,93(6):811-816.
[17] Lee RH, Lyles KW, Colon-Emeric C . A review of the effect of anticonvulsant medications on bone mineral density and fracture risk[J]. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother, 2010,8(1):34-46.
[18] Guimarães JAM, Rocha LR, Noronha Rocha TH , et al. Vertical femoral neck fractures in young adults: a closed fixation strategy using a transverse cancellous lag screw[J]. Injury, 2017,48(Suppl 4):S10-S16.
[19] Razik F, Alexopoulos A, EI-Osta B , et al. Time to internal fixation of femoral neck fractures in patients under sixty years: does this matter in the development of osteonecrosis of femoral head?[J]. Int Orthop, 2012,36(10):2127-2132.
[20] Papakostidis C, Panagiotopoulos A, Piccioli A , et al. Timing of internal fixation of femoral neck fractures. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the final outcome[J]. Injury, 2015,46(3):459-466.
[21] Lamb JN, Panteli, Pneumaticos SG , et al. Epidemiolog of pertrochanteric fractures: our institutional experience[J]. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2014,40(3):225-232.
[22] Basso T, Klaksvik J, Syversen U , et al. Biomechanical femoral neck fracture experiments: a narrative review[J]. Injury, 2012,43(10):1633-1639.
[23] van Embden D, Roukema GR, Rhemrev SJ , et al. The Pauwels classification for intracapsular hip fractures: is it reliable?[J]. Injury, 2011,42(11):1238-1240.
[24] Wang SH, Yang JJ, Shen HC , et al. Using a modified Pauwels method to predict the outcome of femoral neck fracture in relatively young patients[J]. Injury, 2015,46(10):1969-1974.
[25] Florschutz AV, Langford JR, Haidukewych GJ , et al. Femoral neck fractures: current management[J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2015,29(3):121-129.
[26] Parker MJ, Blundell C . Choice of implant for internal fixation of femoral neck fractures. Meta-analysis of 25 randomised trials including 4,925 patients[J]. Acta Orthop Scand, 1998,69(2):138-143.
[27] Bhandari M, Tornetta P, Hanson B , et al. Optimal internal fixation for femoral neck fractures: multiple screws or sliding hip screws?[J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2009,23(6):403-407.
[28] Gardner S, Weaver MJ, Jerabek S , et al. Predictors of early fai-lure in young patients with displaced femoral neck fractures[J]. J Orthop, 2014,12(2):75-80.
[29] Johnson JP, Borenstein TR, Waryasz GR , et al. Vertically oriented femoral neck fractures: a biomechanical comparison of 3 fixation contructs[J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2017,31(7):363-368.
[30] Noda M, Saegusa Y, Takahashi M , et al. Biomechanical study using the finite element method of internal fixation in Pauwels type III vertical femoral neck fractures[J]. Arch Trauma Res, 2015,4(3):e23167.
[31] Samsami S, Saberi S, Bagheri N , et al. Interfragmentary motion assessment for three different fixation techniques of femoral neck fractures in young adults[J]. Biomed Mater Eng, 2016,27(4):389-404.
[32] Min BW, Kim SJ . Avascular necrosis of the femoral head after osteosynjournal of femoral neck fracture[J]. Orthopedics, 2011,34(5):349.
[33] Hoshino CM, Christian MW ,O'Toole RV, et al.Fixation of displaced femoral neck fractures in young adults: fixed-angle devices or Pauwel screws?[J]. Injury, 2016,47(8):1676-1694.
[34] FIlipov O, Stoffel K, Gueorguiev B , et al. Femoral neck fracture osteosynjournal by the biplane double-supported screw fixation method (BDSF) reduces the risk of fixation failure: clinical outcomes in 207 patients[J]. Arch Orchop Trauma Surg, 2017,137(6):779-788.
[35] Khani GMK, Hafeez K, Bux M , et al. Use of fibular bone graft and cancellous screw fixation in the management of neglected femur neck fractures in young patients[J]. Int J Health Sci (Qassim), 2017,11(5):7-10.
[36] Li G, Jin D, Shao X , et al. Effect of cannulated screws with deep circumflex iliac artery-bone grafting in the treatment of femoral neck fracture in young adults[J]. Injury, 2018,49(8):1587-1593.
[37] Kalsbeek JH, van Walsum ADP, Vroemen JPAM , et al. Displaced femoral neck fractures in patients 60 years of age or younger: results of internal fixation with the dynamic locking blade plate[J]. Bone Joint J, 2018,100(4):443-449.
[1] 李志存, 吴天俣, 梁磊, 范宇, 孟一森, 张骞. 穿刺活检单针阳性前列腺癌术后病理升级的危险因素分析及列线图模型构建[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(5): 896-901.
[2] 颜野,李小龙,夏海缀,朱学华,张羽婷,张帆,刘可,刘承,马潞林. 前列腺癌根治术后远期膀胱过度活动症的危险因素[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(4): 589-593.
[3] 陈延,李况蒙,洪锴,张树栋,程建星,郑仲杰,唐文豪,赵连明,张海涛,姜辉,林浩成. 阴茎海绵体注射试验对阴茎血管功能影响的回顾性研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(4): 680-686.
[4] 庞博,郭桐君,陈曦,郭华棋,石嘉章,陈娟,王欣梅,李耀妍,单安琪,余恒意,黄婧,汤乃军,王艳,郭新彪,李国星,吴少伟. 天津与上海35岁以上人群氮氧化物个体暴露水平及其影响因素[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(4): 700-707.
[5] 和静,房中则,杨颖,刘静,马文瑶,霍勇,高炜,武阳丰,谢高强. 血浆中脂质代谢分子与颈动脉粥样硬化斑块、传统心血管危险因素及膳食因素的关系[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(4): 722-728.
[6] 蔡珊,张依航,陈子玥,刘云飞,党佳佳,师嫡,李佳欣,黄天彧,马军,宋逸. 北京市中小学生身体活动时间现状及影响因素的路径[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(3): 403-410.
[7] 张祖洪,陈天娇,马军. 中小学生青春发动时相与心血管代谢危险因素的相关性[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(3): 418-423.
[8] 林郁婷,王华丽,田宇,巩俐彤,常春. 北京市老年人认知功能的影响因素[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(3): 456-461.
[9] 朱金荣,赵亚娜,黄巍,赵微微,王悦,王松,苏春燕. 感染新型冠状病毒的血液透析患者的临床特征[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(2): 267-272.
[10] 赖展鸿,李嘉辰,贠泽霖,张永刚,张昊,邢晓燕,邵苗,金月波,王乃迪,李依敏,李玉慧,栗占国. 特发性炎性肌病完全临床应答相关因素的单中心真实世界研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(2): 284-292.
[11] 司筱芊,赵秀娟,朱凤雪,王天兵. 创伤出血性休克后急性呼吸窘迫综合征的危险因素[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(2): 307-312.
[12] 李洋洋,侯林,马紫君,黄山雅美,刘捷,曾超美,秦炯. 孕期因素与婴儿牛奶蛋白过敏的关系[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(1): 144-149.
[13] 刘晓强,周寅. 牙种植同期植骨术围术期高血压的相关危险因素[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(1): 93-98.
[14] 罗靓,李云,王红彦,相晓红,赵静,孙峰,张晓盈,贾汝琳,李春. 抗内皮细胞抗体检测在早期流产中的预测价值[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2023, 55(6): 1039-1044.
[15] 游芳凝,罗靓,刘香君,张学武,李春. 未分化结缔组织病患者的妊娠结局、疾病演变及其影响因素[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2023, 55(6): 1045-1052.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
ISSN 1671-167X
CN 11-4691/R
主管单位：中华人民共和国教育部
主办单位：北京大学
地址： 北京市海淀区学院路38号 北京大学医学部 《北京大学学报（医学版）》
邮编：100191
电话：010-82801551
Email： xbbjb2@bjmu.edu.cn

《北京大学学报（医学版）》
微信公众号
版权所有 © 2018 《北京大学学报（医学版）》编辑部