Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Looking at the current three surgical programs for Mason type-Ⅲ radial head fracture, each of them has advantages and disadvantages. There is still some controversy in the choice of surgical program.
OBJECTIVE: To compare curative effect of radial head resection, internal fixation and radial head prosthesis replacement for the treatment of Mason type-Ⅲ radial head fracture, and to explore more reasonable and more effective treatment methods.
METHODS: The clinical data of 33 patients with Mason type-Ⅲ radial head fracture were analyzed, according to different surgical techniques, and the patients were divided into resection group (n=11), internal fixation group (n=11) and replacement group (n=11). The results of the three groups were assessed by statistical analysis after follow-up.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: All patients were followed-up for 12 to 53 months with an average of 20 months. The patients of three groups were all satisfied with the elbow joint function. There was no significant difference in the pain visual analogue scale score and flexion and extension activity of the elbow among three groups (P > 0.05), but there was significant difference in forearm rotation angle, carrying angle observed by X-ray, shift of radius and Broberg and Morrey elbow scores among three groups, and the indicators in replacement group were better than those in the internal fixation group, and the internal fixation group was better than the resection group. It indicates that the radial head prosthesis replacement for the treatment of Mason type-Ⅲ radial head fracture can get better elbow joint dysfunction compared with radial head resection and internal fixation.