Abstract
Introduction
Proximal tibial fractures frequently present in combination with other injuries which also have to be treated surgically. Recent publications do not consider isolated proximal tibial fracture (mono-injury) and combined injuries which include tibial fractures as two seperate medical entities. We therefore asessed the influence of additional injuries on treatment and outcome of the proximal tibial fractures.
Methods
We admitted 84 patients which were consecutively treated in our department from 01.01.2007 to 31.12.2009. Only C1 to C3 fractures (x-ray, ct-scan), according to AO classification with subsequent open reduction and internal plate osteosynthesis were included. Additionally we looked for additional injuries cause by the accident, numbers of operations and strategie of operative treatement, traumaspecific vs. postsurgical complications and inpatient days. At the follow-up investigations one year post surgery, Lysholm- and WOMAC-Score as well as Tegner-Activity-Index were used.
Results
The study includes 84 patients with 85 proximal tibia-C-fractures. Four fractures were classified as C1, 15 as C2 and 66 as C3. In 57 cases there was an isolated tibial fracture (I), 27 patients had combined injuries (C).
The average age was 51,2 (I) and 55,4 (C), the gender ratio 36m/21f (I) versus 15m/12f (C).
In 39 cases people had a recreational accident, 27 persons were involved in traffic accidents, 11 persons suffered from occupational injuries and 7 people got injured in their domestic environment.
The average number of surgery the patients underwent was 2,32 (I) against 2,34 (C). Osteosynthesis was performed in 46% (I) vs. 50% (C) in one operation, subse-quently the other patients needed further surgical treatement. Autogen or allogen bonegrafts respectively artificial bone was used in 49,1% (I) vs. 42,8% (C).
Traumaspecific problems such as compartment-syndrome or vessel-/nerve-injury occured in 31,6% (I) vs 25% (C), postsurgical complications appeared in 28% (I) vs 33,3% (C). The hospitalisation was 24 (I) vs 45 (C) days.
Until the end of 2009, 54% of the patients could be included in our follow up, the average follow up was 15 months.
The Lysholm-Score was 66,61 (I) vs 56,75 (C), the Tegner-Activity-Index was 4 (I) vs 1,41 (C), the WOMAC A was 90,2 (I) vs 68,6 (C), the WOMAC B was 77,6 (I) vs 65 (C) and the WOMAC C was 88,2 (I) vs. 72,9 (C).
Conclusion
Concerning AO-Classification, complication rates and treatment data, both groups seem to be almost indentical in this study. In comparison to this we found a difference in the knee-joint-scores one year after trauma. Our figures show, that additional injuries do have a considerable influence in pain, stability and activity level of the knee/patient one year after trauma.
