RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To explore the efficacy of arthroscopic-assisted reduction and internal fixation (ARIF) and traditional open reduction and internal fixation in the treatment of talus fractures. METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 92 patients with talus fractures admitted to our hospital. The patients were divided into a control group (treated with traditional open reduction and internal fixation) and a research group (with ARIF) with 46 cases in each. The operation indices, the score of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot Scoring System (AOFAS-AH), callus growth score, pain score, treatment effect, complications and quality of life score were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The research group showed shorter time of fracture healing, hospitalization and less intraoperative blood loss than the control group (all P<0.001). The ankle-hindfoot score in the research group was higher than those in the control group 3 and 6 months after surgery (both P<0.001). The excellent and good rate of treatment in the research group (93.48%) was higher than that in the control group (78.26%; P<0.05). Compared with the control group, the VAS score was lower and the callus growth score was higher in the research group at 1st, 3rd and 6th month after surgery (all P<0.01). The incidence of complications in the research group (2.17%) was lower than that in the control group (13.04%; P<0.05). Six months after surgery, the SF-36 score increased compared with that before surgery, with higher parameters in the research group than in the control group (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: ARIF is more effective than traditional open reduction and internal fixation in treating talus fractures, with less complications and higher safety.
