Objective To observe the effectiveness of posterior approaches for the treatment of posterior coronal fractures of tibial plateau, and to analyze the fracture morphology, radiographic features, and the recognition of Schatzker classification. Methods Between June 2003 and June 2009, 23 patients with posterior coronal fractures of tibial plateau were treated surgically by posterior approaches. There were 15 males and 8 females with an average age of 38 years (range, 32-56 years). All patients had closed fractures. Fracture was caused by traffic accident in 15 cases, by sports in 3 cases, and by falling from height in 5 cases. According to Moore classification, there were 10 cases of type I, 9 cases of type II, and 4 cases of type IV. The X-ray films, CT scanning, and three-dimensional reconstruction were performed. The time from injury to operation was 3-14 days (mean, 6 days). Results After operation, 17 cases had anatomical reduction and 6 had normal reduction. Incisions healed by first intention. All cases were followed up 12 to 36 months (mean, 24 months). The average fracture healing time was 7.6 months (range, 6-9 months). No related complication occurred, such as nerve and vessel injuries, failure in internal fixation, ankylosis, traumatic osteoarthritis, and malunion. According to Rasmussen’s criteria for the function of the knee, the results were excellent in 14 cases, good in 7 cases, and fair in 2 cases with an excellent and good rate of 91.3%. Conclusion Posterior coronal fracture of tibial plateau is rare, which has distinctive morphological features, and Schatzker classification can not contain it totally. The advantages of posterior approach include reduction of articular surface under visualization, firm fixation, less complications, and earlier functional exercise, so it is an ideal surgical treatment plan.
Citation： FANG Yue,MA Kunlong,YANG Tianfu,ZHANG Hui,WANG Guanglin,LIU Lei.. EFFECTIVENESS OF POSTERIOR APPROACHES FOR TREATMENT OF POSTERIOR CORONAL FRACTURE OF TIBIAL PLATEAU. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 2011, 25(9): 1082-1086. doi: Copy