{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01725554642563681, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.6923076923076925, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A retrospective clinical control study of extended anterolateral approach and Frosch approach in Schatzker type II tibial plateau fractures involving  the posterolateral  column


 Objective: To compare the extended anterolateral approach with the Frosch approach in the treatment of Schatzker type II tibial plateau fractures involving the posterolateral column. Methods: A retrospective case-control study was conducted to compare the general information, intraoperative and postoperative situations, HSS score and Rasmussen radiology score, TPA, and PSA immediately after the operation and at one-year follow-up.Results: There was no statistical difference between the two groups in general information, which was comparable. The operation time in the Frosch group was slightly higher than those in the control group, while the HSS score and Rasmussen radiology score were better than those in the control group.Conclusion: In the case with simple posterolateral fragments, the extended anterolateral approach and the Frosch approach can both achieve better outcomes. While in the case of complex posterolateral fragments, the Frosch approach can provide more accurate reduction and better biomechanical stability.