Retrospective cohort study

Blood loss

Mathematics

Orthopedic surgery

Complication

Reduction (mathematics)

Surgery

Geometry

Iliac fossa

Perioperative

Anesthesia

Medicine

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

Background At present, the choice of surgical approach for both-column fractures is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to explore the efficacy of the Stoppa combined with iliac fossa (S+IF) approach in the treatment of both-column fractures. Methods In this retrospective case series, 76 patients were included in the study from 2014 to 2018. They were divided into two groups according to the surgical approaches. The differences of intraoperative blood loss, operative time, quality of reduction, clinical outcome, and perioperative complications were compared between the two groups. Results All patients had undergone the IL approach or the S+IF approach. The average operative time was 156.2 min (110~210 min) in group I and 126.5 min (80~180 min) in group II ( P &lt; 0.001). The average blood loss in group I was 784.1 ml, while the average blood loss in group II was 625.3 ml ( P = 0.007). According to Matta’s criteria, 28 cases obtained anatomic reduction and 12 cases got imperfect reduction in group I; 21 cases obtained anatomic reduction and 7 cases got imperfect reduction in group II ( P &gt; 0.05). The clinical outcome (excellent to good) was 66% in group I versus 69% in group II ( P &gt; 0.05). The complication rates were 18.2% in group I and 12.5% in group II ( P &gt; 0.05) . Conclusions As a minimally invasive surgical approach, the S+IF approach is a valuable alternative to the IL approach for the treatment of both-column acetabular fractures if these two anterior approaches can achieve fracture exposure, reduction, and fixation.

The Stoppa combined with iliac fossa approach for the treatment of both-column acetabular fractures