• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Monteggia lesion and its equivalents in children

M. Čepelík, T. Pešl, J. Hendrych, P. Havránek,

. 2019 ; 13 (6) : 560-568. [pub] 2019Dec01

Jazyk angličtina Země Velká Británie

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc20005418

Purpose: The aim of the study is to evaluate our group of paediatric patients with Monteggia lesion and its equivalents and to compare the characteristics of basic types of these lesions concerning therapeutic approach and results of the treatment. Methods: Retrospective study of 111 children treated in the Department of Pediatric and Trauma Surgery of the Thomayer Hospital in Prague between 2001 and 2013 (13 years). When evaluating the outcome of the therapy, Bruce's criteria modified by Letts that assesses range of movement, pain and deformity of the elbow joint were applied. Regarding the therapeutic approach, four groups were compared: nonoperative treatment, reduction and casting, closed reduction and internal fixation (CRIF) and opened reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). Results were compared between three groups of patients (Monteggia lesions, displaced equivalents and non-displaced equivalents) using Fisher´s exact test with α set to 0.05. Results: In all, 46 patients were treated for (true) Monteggia lesion, 27 for non-displaced Monteggia equivalent and 38 for displaced equivalent. There is a statistically significant difference in therapeutic approach between all three groups of patients. There is no significant difference in outcome between Monteggia lesions and both types of Monteggia equivalents, but there is a statistically significant difference between displaced and non-displaced equivalents. Conclusion: There are only two lesions that meet the criteria of Monteggia - (true) Monteggia lesion and displaced Monteggia equivalent. The non-displaced equivalent does not meet the criteria of Monteggia and, therefore, should not be termed a Monteggia equivalent. Level of Evidence: Level III - Retrospective comparative study.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc20005418
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20210204124106.0
007      
ta
008      
200511s2019 xxk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1302/1863-2548.13.190131 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)31908672
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxk
100    1_
$a Čepelík, M $u Department of Pediatric and Trauma Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Thomayer Hospital, Prague.
245    10
$a Monteggia lesion and its equivalents in children / $c M. Čepelík, T. Pešl, J. Hendrych, P. Havránek,
520    9_
$a Purpose: The aim of the study is to evaluate our group of paediatric patients with Monteggia lesion and its equivalents and to compare the characteristics of basic types of these lesions concerning therapeutic approach and results of the treatment. Methods: Retrospective study of 111 children treated in the Department of Pediatric and Trauma Surgery of the Thomayer Hospital in Prague between 2001 and 2013 (13 years). When evaluating the outcome of the therapy, Bruce's criteria modified by Letts that assesses range of movement, pain and deformity of the elbow joint were applied. Regarding the therapeutic approach, four groups were compared: nonoperative treatment, reduction and casting, closed reduction and internal fixation (CRIF) and opened reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). Results were compared between three groups of patients (Monteggia lesions, displaced equivalents and non-displaced equivalents) using Fisher´s exact test with α set to 0.05. Results: In all, 46 patients were treated for (true) Monteggia lesion, 27 for non-displaced Monteggia equivalent and 38 for displaced equivalent. There is a statistically significant difference in therapeutic approach between all three groups of patients. There is no significant difference in outcome between Monteggia lesions and both types of Monteggia equivalents, but there is a statistically significant difference between displaced and non-displaced equivalents. Conclusion: There are only two lesions that meet the criteria of Monteggia - (true) Monteggia lesion and displaced Monteggia equivalent. The non-displaced equivalent does not meet the criteria of Monteggia and, therefore, should not be termed a Monteggia equivalent. Level of Evidence: Level III - Retrospective comparative study.
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Pešl, T $u Department of Pediatric and Trauma Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Thomayer Hospital, Prague.
700    1_
$a Hendrych, J $u Department of Pediatric and Trauma Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Thomayer Hospital, Prague.
700    1_
$a Havránek, P $u Department of Pediatric and Trauma Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Thomayer Hospital, Prague.
773    0_
$w MED00191300 $t Journal of children's orthopaedics $x 1863-2521 $g Roč. 13, č. 6 (2019), s. 560-568
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31908672 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20200511 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20210204124104 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ind $b bmc $g 1524348 $s 1095473
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2019 $b 13 $c 6 $d 560-568 $e 2019Dec01 $i 1863-2521 $m Journal of children's orthopaedics $n J Child Orthop $x MED00191300
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20200511

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...