Skip to main content
Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery logoLink to Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery
. 2025 Aug;39(8):1030–1036. [Article in Chinese] doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202503077

胫骨横向骨搬移术治疗Wagner 3~4级2型糖尿病足溃疡的临床疗效及免疫球蛋白水平变化研究

Study on effectiveness and changes in immunoglobulin levels of transverse tibial transport in treatment of Wagner grade 3-4 type 2 diabetic foot ulcer

Xianjun YU 1, Dingwei ZHANG 1,*, Lin YU 2, Sichun ZHAO 1, Rong HU 1, Xiaoya LI 1
PMCID: PMC12367439  PMID: 40830130

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the effectiveness of tibial transverse transport (TTT) in treating Wagner grade 3-4 type 2 diabetic foot ulcers and analyze dynamic changes in immunoglobulin levels.

Methods

The clinical data of 68 patients with Wagner grade 3-4 type 2 diabetic foot ulcers treated with TTT between May 2022 and September 2023 was retrospectively analyzed. The cohort included 49 males and 19 females, aged 44-91 years (mean, 67.3 years), with 40 Wagner grade 3 and 28 grade 4 ulcers. The duration of type 2 diabetes ranged from 5 to 23 years, with an average of 10 years. The number of wound healing cases, healing time, amputation cases, death cases, and complications were observed and recorded. Serum samples were collected at 6 key time points [1 day before TTT and 3 days, 7 days (the first day of upward transverse transfer), 14 days (the first day of downward transverse transfer), 21 days (the first day after the end of transfer), 36 days (the first day after the removal of the transfer device)], and the serum immunoglobulin levels were detected by flow cytometry including immunoglobulin G (IgG), IgA, IgM, IgE, complement C3 (C3), C4, immunoglobulin light chain κ (KAP), immunoglobulin light chain λ (LAM).

Results

All the 68 patients were followed up 6 months. Postoperative pin tract infection occurred in 3 cases and incision infection in 2 cases. Amputation occurred in 5 patients (7.4%) at 59-103 days after operation, and 8 patients (11.8%) died at 49-77 days after operation; the wounds of the remaining 55 patients (80.9%) healed in 48-135 days, with an average of 80 days. There was no recurrence of ulcer, peri-osteotomy fracture, or local skin necrosis during follow-up. The serum immunoglobulin levels of 55 patients with wound healing showed that the levels of IgG and IgM decreased significantly on the 3rd and 7th day after operation compared with those before operation (P<0.05), and gradually returned to the levels before operation after 14 days, and reached the peak on the 36th day. IgA levels continued to decrease with time, and there were significant differences at all time points when compared with those before operation (P<0.05). The level of IgE significantly decreased at 21 days after operation compared with that before operation (P<0.05), while it was higher at other time points than that before operation, but the difference was not significant (P>0.05). The level of C3 showed a clear treatment-related increase, which was significantly higher on the 7th, 14th, and 21st days after operation than that before operation (P<0.05), and the peak appeared on the 14th day. The change trend of C4 level was basically synchronous with that of C3, but the amplitude was smaller, and the difference was significant at 7 and 14 days after operation compared with that before operation (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in KAP/LAM between different time points before and after operation (P>0.05).

Conclusion

TTT can accelerate wound healing, effectively treat diabetic foot ulcer, and reduce amputation rate, and has definite effectiveness. The potential mechanisms of TTT in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers include the dynamic regulation of IgG, IgA, IgM, and IgE levels to balance the process of inflammation and repair, and the periodic increase of C3 and C4 levels may promote tissue cleaning, angiogenesis, and anti-infection defense.

Keywords: Transverse tibial transport, diabetic foot ulcer, immunoglobulin, wound healing mechanism, amputation rate


糖尿病已成为全球患病率最高的慢性病之一,严重影响患者身心健康和生活质量,并造成经济负担[1]。其中,2型糖尿病约占糖尿病患者的90%[2],而糖尿病足是2型糖尿病一种严重并发症[3-5]。研究报道,Wagner 3级乃至更高级别的糖尿病足溃疡患者中,高达90%患者最终不得不面对截肢的结局,截肢后5年内这部分患者死亡率达25%~50%[6-8]。目前,糖尿病足溃疡的临床治疗方法主要包括带血管蒂皮瓣移位、同种异体脱水羊膜移植、血管旁路移植、介入治疗、干细胞移植、生长因子应用以及生物膜覆盖等,但疗效并不理想。因此,对于糖尿病足溃疡尤其是Wagner 3级及以上患者,探索新疗法控制糖尿病足创面感染、降低患者截肢率、改善患者生存质量,具有重要临床意义[9-12]。

胫骨横向骨搬移术(tibial transverse transport,TTT)通过在胫骨中段实施精准骨块移位,有效促进受损区域微血管网络的重建与再生[13]。目前,TTT已应用于下肢缺血性疾病与糖尿病足溃疡的临床治疗[14-16],可促进糖尿病足溃疡愈合,避免截肢,改善患肢功能,提高生活质量[17-18]。然而,国内外对于TTT治疗糖尿病足溃疡的作用机制研究较少,且目前对于Wagner 3级及以上糖尿病足溃疡患者治疗的报道有限。鉴于此,现回顾分析2022年5月—2023年9月于我院行TTT治疗的Wagner 3~4级2型糖尿病足溃疡患者临床资料,进一步探讨TTT治疗此类患者疗效以及糖尿病足溃疡愈合机制。报告如下。

1. 临床资料

1.1. 一般资料

患者纳入标准:① 符合糖尿病足诊断标准;② 接受TTT治疗;③ Wagner 3、4级糖尿病足溃疡;④ 无免疫性疾病;⑤ 术前1 d及术后3 d、7 d(向上横搬移第1天)、14 d(向下横搬移第1天)、21 d(搬移结束后第1天)、36 d(搬移装置去除后第1天)资料完整。排除全身情况差,合并心脏、肾脏衰竭及其他疾病无法耐受手术者。2022年5月—2023年9月共68例(73足)患者符合选择标准纳入研究。

本组男49例,女19例;年龄44~91岁,平均67.3岁。单侧病变63例,其中左足25例,右足38例;双侧病变5例。糖尿病足溃疡Wagner分级为3级40例、4级28例。2型糖尿病病程5~23年,平均10年。

1.2. 治疗方法

患者术前均完善常规筛查项目,严格监控血糖水平 [空腹血糖<8.3 mmol/L,尿糖低于(++),尿酮体阴性]、血压水平 [收缩压<180 mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa),舒张压<100 mm Hg]。术前采集患者足部创面分泌物送细菌培养。

采用持续硬膜外麻醉或全身麻醉后,于大腿中部上止血带。于胫骨中上段内侧骨面上精确截取一60 mm×20 mm骨块;在该骨块上钻凿2个直径2.5 mm的孔,2根横拉牵引针插入孔中;然后分别于胫骨上、下两端钻入2枚直径4.5 mm固定针;最后用薄骨刀精准穿透骨皮质,稳固安装胫骨横向搬移装置。术中彻底清除糖尿病足溃疡创面内的炎性肉芽组织、裸露的坏死肌腱和受损骨质,必要时适度扩大手术范围,为创面愈合创造最佳条件。

术后第7天开始实施胫骨骨窗缓慢横向移动,每日向上搬移1 mm,分6次完成;第14~20天进行反向操作,每日向下搬移1 mm,分6次完成,将胫骨骨块精确复位至原始位置。结束搬移2周后移除胫骨横向搬移装置。

1.3. 术后处理及疗效评价指标

术后患者如无全身症状出现,应避免使用抗生素;本组24例患者围术期使用抗生素治疗感染。根据2024版糖尿病足溃疡创面治疗专家共识[19]实施创面换药处理。住院期间患者均接受活血化瘀、营养神经治疗以加速康复。

出院后继续门诊换药并随访至术后6个月,观察并记录创面愈合例数、愈合时间、截肢例数、死亡例数及并发症发生情况。创面愈合标准:溃疡创面愈合面积≥90%,创面无明显渗出,局部有新鲜肉芽组织、无明显压痛,并且无需再换药处理。

收集TTT治疗糖尿病足的6个关键时间点[20][术前1 d及术后3 d、7 d(向上横搬移第1天)、14 d(向下横搬移第1天)、21 d(搬移结束后第1天)、36 d(搬移装置去除后第1天)]血清标本,–80℃保存备用。采用流式细胞术检测各时间点血清免疫球蛋白水平,包括免疫球蛋白G(immunoglobulin G,IgG)、IgA、IgM、IgE、补体C3(complement C3,C3)、C4、免疫球蛋白轻链κ(immunoglobulin light chain κ,KAP)、免疫球蛋白轻链λ(immunoglobulin light chain λ,LAM),其中KAP和LAM水平以KAP/LAM表示。

1.4. 统计学方法

采用SPSS29.0统计软件进行分析。为了有效防止因直接剔除含有缺失值的数据而导致的统计检验效能下降与潜在偏差,采用多重插补方法进行缺失值的估计与填充。计量资料行Shapiro-Wilk正态性检验,均不符合正态分布,数据以M(Q1,Q3)表示,各时间点间比较采用Wilcoxon配对秩和检验。检验水准取双侧α=0.05。

2. 结果

术后68例患者均随访至6个月。术后发生钉道感染3例、切口感染2例。其中5例患者(7.4%)分别因合并肺部感染、低蛋白血症、深静脉血栓形成,于术后59~103 d行截肢处理(包括钉道感染1例、切口感染1例);8例患者(11.8%)于术后49~77 d死亡(原因不明;包括钉道感染2例、切口感染1例)。余55例患者(80.9%)创面均愈合,愈合时间48~135 d,平均80 d。随访期间无溃疡复发、截骨周围骨折及截骨区域皮肤坏死发生。见图1。

图 1.

A 47-year-old male patient with left Wagner grade 4 type 2 diabetic foot ulcer

患者,男,47岁,左侧Wagner 4级2型糖尿病足溃疡

a、b. 术前可见坏死足趾,左足背及足底有明显红肿及破溃渗液;c、d. 术后14 d(向下横搬第1天),创面少许渗液,无明显坏死组织,有少许肉芽生长;e、f. 术后2个月创面逐渐被肉芽组织覆盖;g、h. 术后4个月创面完全愈合

a, b. Necrotic toes could be seen before operation, and obvious swelling and ulceration exudation could be seen on the left dorsum and sole of the foot; c, d. At 14 days after operation (the first day of downward transverse), there was a little exudation on the wound surface, no obvious necrotic tissue, and a little granulation growth; e, f. The wound surface was gradually covered by granulation tissue at 2 months after operation; g, h. The wound surface was completely healed at 4 months after operation

图 1

55例创面愈合患者血清免疫球蛋白水平检测示,与术前比较,术后3、7 d IgG、IgM水平显著下降,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),14 d后逐渐恢复至术前水平,36 d达峰值。IgA水平随时间延长持续下调,各时间点与术前比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。IgE水平变化表现出显著的时间异质性,术后21 d较术前明显下降,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);其他时间点均高于术前,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。C3水平呈现明确的治疗相关性升高,术后7、14、21 d较术前显著提升,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),峰值出现在14 d。C4水平变化趋势与C3基本一致但变化幅度较小,术后7、14 d与术前比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。KAP/LAM水平手术前后各时间点间差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。见表1。

表 1.

Comparison of expressions of immunoglobulin in serum between different time points [n=55, M (Q1, Q3), pg/mL]

各时间点血清中免疫球蛋白水平比较 [n=55,M(Q1,Q3),pg/mL]

时间
Time
IgG IgA IgM IgE C3 C4 KAP/LAM
* 与术前1 d比较P<0.05
* Compared with preoperative value at 1 day, P<0.05
术前1 d 12.85(10.58,16.33) 3.12(2.28,4.13) 0.84(0.55,1.24) 50.00(20.75,157.25) 1.23(1.07,1.38) 0.35(0.28,0.42) 1.64(1.47,1.92)
术后3 d 12.10(10.04,15.70)* 3.00(2.26,3.92)* 0.79(0.55,1.16)* 53.00(23.25,190.00) 1.20(1.05,1.39) 0.35(0.28,0.43) 1.59(1.46,1.89)
术后7 d 12.30(9.75,15.45)* 2.88(2.20,3.55)* 0.76(0.55,1.15)* 59.00(21.00,161.46) 1.31(1.16,1.45)* 0.38(0.29,0.45)* 1.61(1.47,1.86)
术后14 d 13.15(10.30,16.63) 2.88(2.19,3.67)* 0.87(0.62,1.28) 58.00(20.98,163.70) 1.37(1.18,1.55)* 0.38(0.29,0.43)* 1.60(1.43,1.88)
术后21 d 13.30(10.38,16.85) 2.84(2.27,3.83)* 0.87(0.61,1.23) 42.50(13.83,111.00)* 1.32(1.10,1.47)* 0.35(0.30,0.42) 1.66(1.43,1.96)
术后36 d 14.20(10.65,17.30) 2.67(1.91,3.70)* 0.93(0.64,1.40) 52.00(17.75,208.25) 1.26(1.08,1.46) 0.36(0.28,0.41) 1.59(1.42,1.90)
统计值 Z=35.511
P<0.001
Z=24.378
P<0.001
Z=11.090
P=0.050
Z=20.781
P=0.001
Z=34.244
P<0.001
Z=25.557
P<0.001
Z=4.222
P=0.518

3. 讨论

Ilizarov技术最初应用于矫正肢体畸形且获得了良好效果[21]。学者们在治疗过程中发现缓慢牵拉截骨块时,牵拉区域成骨前先出现了微血管网生发,血管造影也证实截骨牵拉区重建了“新生血管与微循环”,使得成骨时有更充足的血液灌注与养分供应[22-23]。Shevtsov等[24]于1997年首次将TTT技术用于治疗由血栓闭塞性脉管炎引发的下肢远端缺血问题。2001年,国内曲龙等[25]采用TTT技术治疗血栓闭塞性脉管炎,显示出较好效果。随后,国内骨科医师探索将TTT技术用于糖尿病足溃疡治疗[16,26-31],取得较好临床效果。这一创新理念目前已在我国成功应用于上千例临床病例,实践经验充分表明TTT技术能够显著加速溃疡创面的修复进程,有效提升严重糖尿病足溃疡的愈合比例与保肢成功率。并于2020年形成TTT技术治疗糖尿病足的专家共识[32],进一步规范了TTT技术应用于糖尿病足溃疡治疗的适应证、禁忌证、手术方法及围术期管理。

尽管多项临床研究表明TTT技术在加速患者创面愈合、避免截肢方面具有确切效果,但其具体机制尚无明确结论。目前国内外主要研究方向集中在炎症因子、细胞因子、血管生成等方面[17,33-36]。Sawaya等[37]研究发现,在糖尿病足溃疡疾病进展过程中,负责激活和促进免疫细胞生存的转录因子叉头框蛋白M1(FOXM1)被抑制,导致中性粒细胞和巨噬细胞招募减少和整体炎症反应控制不良、糖尿病创面愈合延迟。在促进糖尿病足溃疡愈合相关机制研究中报道,TFAP2A-LIFR-Hippo-YAP信号轴通过诱导巨噬细胞M2极化加速了糖尿病足溃疡创面愈合,为治疗慢性糖尿病足溃疡创面提供了一个前景广阔的治疗靶点[38]。质子转运ATP合成酶复合体ε亚基(ATP5E,一种蛋白抗体)可能与糖尿病的生态重塑有关,端粒保护蛋白1(TPP1)、toll样受体4(TLR4)和蛋白激酶2(RIPK2)是治疗糖尿病足溃疡的潜在靶点[39]。这些研究结果说明机体免疫调节在创面愈合过程中扮演了非常重要的角色。另外也有研究报道,在CD31和α-平滑肌肌动蛋白双重免疫标记的TTT组,新生血管增强、创面处M2巨噬细胞数量增加,表明TTT技术能增强血管生成和免疫调节,从而促进创面愈合[40]。围术期中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞计数比值(neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio,NLR)是创面愈合结果的有效预测生物标志物,有研究证实TTT技术显著影响围术期的NLR,因此针对NLR制定围术期管理策略和术后监测方案对糖尿病足溃疡治疗有临床意义[31]。研究发现,TTT技术可诱导机体免疫反应,重建M1、M2巨噬细胞平衡,从而促进糖尿病足溃疡创面的愈合[41-43]。本团队前期研究发现[20],TTT技术通过激活全身免疫反应治疗糖尿病足,从蛋白质组学中揭示了TTT诱导的免疫反应,向上搬移参与激活全身免疫反应,向下搬移促进创面愈合,这一结果和本研究中C3、C4水平的变化趋势有相似之处。总的来说,这些发现揭示了TTT技术可以诱导免疫反应,促进创面愈合。

本研究纳入的68例患者中,44例(64.7%)在整个过程中未使用抗生素,但感染得到了很好控制。55例(80.9%)于平均80 d创面愈合,其中5例双侧溃疡患者均治愈,共13例截肢(7.4%)或死亡(11.8%),术后主要并发症为钉道感染(4.4%)和切口感染(2.9%)。本研究进一步提示了TTT技术在糖尿病足溃疡患者中的临床疗效。本研究发现,TTT治疗显著影响糖尿病足溃疡患者的体液免疫应答。术后IgG水平早期下降、后期回升的变化趋势提示,治疗初期可能通过适度抑制炎症反应减轻组织损伤,而后期升高可能促进抗体介导的修复过程。IgA水平的持续性下调可能有助于减少黏膜免疫相关的过度炎症反应,为创面提供更稳定的愈合环境。IgM水平的短暂下降及后期恢复表明,TTT对天然免疫的调节是可控且可逆的,可避免长期免疫抑制。IgE水平在术后21 d显著降低的结果进一步支持TTT可能通过抑制Ⅰ型超敏反应,减少过敏相关炎症,从而优化创面修复条件。C3和C4水平于术后7~21 d升高,该趋势与创面愈合的关键阶段高度吻合。C3水平的峰值出现在术后14 d(较基线升高11.4%),提示补体激活可能通过促进调理作用、趋化因子释放及膜攻击复合物形成,加速坏死组织清除和血管再生。C4水平的同步升高(增幅8.6%)则表明经典补体通路可能被选择性激活,其精准调控有助于避免过度炎症反应导致的继发性损伤。这些发现为“补体系统在糖尿病足溃疡愈合中起关键调节作用”[44-45]提供了直接证据。KAP/LAM在术后各时间点与术前比较差异均无统计学意义,提示患者B细胞功能稳定,无继发性轻链相关疾病风险,因此临床上无需针对其异常进行干预。本研究结果显示TTT技术促进创面修复的关键步骤可能是在向上搬运时,因此我们在最新的TTT手术研究中优化了TTT技术方案时间,将总时长降为19 d。

为保证手术同质化效果,本研究手术操作均由同一团队医生进行,创面处理也均由同一伤口治疗师进行。但本研究也存在一定局限性,首先样本量较小,可能会造成一定的结果偏倚;其次,临床分析中免疫球蛋白定量测定结果受免疫球蛋白半衰期、标本处理、钉道感染、切口感染等多种混杂因素影响,本研究虽然观察到TTT术后C3、C4水平发生了显著变化,但是其影响创面愈合的分子机制还不明确。未来研究将纳入更多患者,验证 TTT技术激活免疫球蛋白水平促进创面修复的机制,以促进TTT技术的可持续优化和临床应用;还可通过建立动物模型来观察其他免疫相关蛋白的变化规律,以及促进创面愈合的具体方式。

综上述,本研究结果表明TTT技术可加速创面愈合,有效治疗糖尿病足溃疡,降低截肢率,临床疗效确切;并通过免疫球蛋白水平变化研究,初步发现TTT治疗糖尿病足溃疡的潜在机制。通过动态调控IgG、IgA、IgM和IgE水平,可平衡炎症与修复过程;C3、C4水平的阶段性升高可能促进组织清理、血管再生和抗感染防御。这些发现不仅为TTT的临床疗效提供了免疫学依据,还提示C3、C4及IgG等指标可作为监测治疗反应的潜在生物标志物。未来研究可进一步探索补体系统与创面愈合的分子机制,以优化糖尿病足溃疡的免疫调节治疗策略。

利益冲突 在课题研究和文章撰写过程中不存在利益冲突;经费支持没有影响文章观点和对研究数据客观结果的统计分析及其报道

伦理声明 研究方案经绵阳市中心医院生物医学伦理委员会批准(S20240201-01);患者均知情同意

作者贡献声明 喻先军:查阅文献、整理数据和论文撰写;李晓娅、胡蓉:数据收集、患者随访;张定伟、喻先军、赵思淳:参与手术;余琳、张定伟:对文章修改提出建设性意见

Funding Statement

四川省医学会骨科(尚安通)专项科研课题(2023SAT32);2024年四川省卫生健康委员会青年苗圃项目(24QNMP081)

Special Scientific Research Project of Sichuan Medical Association Orthopedics (Shang An Tong) (2023SAT32); Youth Seedling Project of Sichuan Provincial Health Commission (24QNMP081)

References

  • 1.American Diabetes Association. 2. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2016, 39 Suppl 1: S13-S22.
  • 2.Cho NH, Shaw JE, Karuranga S, et al IDF Diabetes Atlas: Global estimates of diabetes prevalence for 2017 and projections for 2045. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2018;138:271–281. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2018.02.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Harding JL, Pavkov ME, Magliano DJ, et al Global trends in diabetes complications: a review of current evidence. Diabetologia. 2019;62(1):3–16. doi: 10.1007/s00125-018-4711-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Ceriello A, Prattichizzo F, Phillip M, et al Glycaemic management in diabetes: old and new approaches. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2022;10(1):75–84. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(21)00245-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Whittemore R, Vilar-Compte M, De La Cerda S, et al Challenges to diabetes self-management for adults with type 2 diabetes in low-resource settings in Mexico City: a qualitative descriptive study. Int J Equity Health. 2019;18(1):133. doi: 10.1186/s12939-019-1035-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Williams R, Karuranga S, Malanda B, et al Global and regional estimates and projections of diabetes-related health expenditure: Results from the International Diabetes Federation Diabetes Atlas, 9th edition. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2020;162:108072. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2020.108072. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Oliver TI, Mutluoglu M. Diabetic foot ulcer. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing, 2023: 1006-1019.
  • 8.Ahmad E, Lim S, Lamptey R, et al Type 2 diabetes. Lancet. 2022;400(10365):1803–1820. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01655-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Prompers L, Huijberts M, Apelqvist J, et al High prevalence of ischaemia, infection and serious comorbidity in patients with diabetic foot disease in Europe. Baseline results from the Eurodiale study. Diabetologia. 2007;50(1):18–25. doi: 10.1007/s00125-006-0491-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Jeffcoate WJ, Vileikyte L, Boyko EJ, et al Current challenges and opportunities in the prevention and management of diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(4):645–652. doi: 10.2337/dc17-1836. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Lekha TY, Angadi N The impact of diabetic foot ulcer on health related quality of life and employment among diabetics attending tertiary care teaching hospital, davangere. National Journal of Community Medicine. 2018;9(11):794–797. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Hingorani A, LaMuraglia GM, Henke P, et al. The management of diabetic foot: A clinical practice guideline by the Society for Vascular Surgery in collaboration with the American Podiatric Medical Association and the Society for Vascular Medicine. J Vasc Surg, 2016, 63(2 Suppl): 3S-21S.
  • 13.Wen R, Cheng X, Cao H, et al Transverse tibial bone transfer in the treatment of diabetes foot ulcer: A pilot study. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2023;16:2005–2012. doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S413884. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.王斌, 刘伟, 宫中平, 等 胫骨横向骨搬移技术的血管条件及重建的探讨. 中国修复重建外科杂志. 2020;34(12):1579–1584. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202006064. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Yuan Y, Ding X, Jing Z, et al Modified tibial transverse transport technique for the treatment of ischemic diabetic foot ulcer in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Orthop Translat. 2021;29:100–105. doi: 10.1016/j.jot.2021.04.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.花奇凯, 王林, 冼呈, 等 Ilizarov胫骨横向骨搬移微循环重建技术治疗下肢慢性缺血性疾病的临床疗效. 中国矫形外科杂志. 2015;23(21):2007–2011. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.镇普祥, 陈炎, 高伟, 等 应用Ilizarov技术胫骨横向骨搬移术治疗合并全身性炎症反应综合征的重度糖尿病足. 中国修复重建外科杂志. 2018;32(10):1261–1266. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.201805024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.苏永锋, 丁毅, 赵永鑫, 等 胫骨横向骨搬移治疗重度感染糖尿病足. 中国矫形外科杂志. 2023;31(19):1735–1741. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.中华医学会内分泌学分会, 中国内分泌代谢病专科联盟 糖尿病足溃疡创面治疗专家共识 (2024) 中华内分泌代谢杂志. 2024;40(7):565–569. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn311282-20240625-00281. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Yu L, Zhang D, Yin Y, et al Tibial cortex transverse transport surgery improves wound healing in patients with severe type 2 DFUs by activating a systemic immune response: a cross-sectional study. Int J Surg. 2025;111(1):257–272. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001897. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.蔡刚, 秦泗河 Ilizarov技术矫正畸形的原则. 中国矫形外科杂志. 2007;15(8):597–600. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-8478.2007.08.014. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Ilizarov GA The tension-stress effect on the genesis and growth of tissues. Part Ⅰ. The influence of stability of fixation and soft-tissue preservation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;(238):249–281. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Ilizarov GA The tension-stress effect on the genesis and growth of tissues: Part Ⅱ. The influence of the rate and frequency of distraction. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;(239):263–285. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Shevtsov VI, Shurova EN, Shurov VA Functional outcomes of legs obliterative endarteritis treatment by Ilizarov’s method. Khirurgiia (Mosk) 1997;(6):47–50. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.曲龙, 王爱林, 汤福刚 胫骨横向搬移血管再生术治疗血栓闭塞性脉管炎. 中华医学杂志. 2001;81(10):622–624. doi: 10.3760/j:issn:0376-2491.2001.10.013. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Chen Y, Kuang X, Zhou J, et al Proximal tibial cortex transverse distraction facilitating healing and limb salvage in severe and recalcitrant diabetic foot ulcers. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(4):836–851. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001075. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.欧栓机, 齐勇, 孙鸿涛, 等 经皮微创胫骨截骨横向骨搬移术治疗糖尿病足. 中国矫形外科杂志. 2018;26(15):1385–1389. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.王林华, 周富强, 卢敏, 等 应用Ilizarov横向骨搬移技术微创截骨治疗糖尿病足13例. 中国中医骨伤科杂志. 2018;26(11):42–45. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.冼呈, 赵劲民, 苏伟, 等 胫骨横向骨搬移微循环再生技术治疗糖尿病足的临床疗效观察. 广西医科大学学报. 2015;32(4):605–607. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.张定伟, 秦泗河, 臧建成 Ilizarov微循环重建技术治疗Wagner 4级糖尿病足临床疗效分析. 中国矫形外科杂志. 2017;25(4):354–356. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Zhao S, Guo F, Zang Y, et al The association of the perioperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio with wound healing in patients with Wagner grade 3 and 4 diabetic foot ulcers after tibial cortex transverse transport surgery: a prospective observational cohort study. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2024;15:1420232. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1420232. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.中国医师协会骨科医师分会中国骨搬移糖尿病足学组 胫骨横向骨搬移技术治疗糖尿病足的专家共识(2020) 中国修复重建外科杂志. 2020;34(8):945–950. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Xu D, Bai C, Hu R, et al Exploring the changes in IL-6 and related cytokines in angiogenesis after tibial transverse transplantation in diabetic foot ulcers. Orthop Surg. 2024;16(9):2181–2190. doi: 10.1111/os.14221. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.杨永康, 李刚 胫骨横向骨搬移技术促进微循环再生及组织修复生物学机制的初步探索. 中国修复重建外科杂志. 2020;34(8):964–968. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202003042. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.林世泓, 杨雄刚, 耿翔, 等 胫骨横向骨搬移技术对糖尿病足的治疗作用及其生物学机制研究进展. 中国临床医学. 2023;30(1):12–17. doi: 10.12025/j.issn.1008-6358.2023.20230045. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Liu J, Huang X, Su H, et al Tibial cortex transverse transport facilitates severe diabetic foot wound healing via HIF-1α-induced angiogenesis. j inflamm res. 2024;17:2681–2696. doi: 10.2147/JIR.S456590. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Sawaya AP, Stone RC, Brooks SR, et al Deregulated immune cell recruitment orchestrated by FOXM1 impairs human diabetic wound healing. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):4678. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-18276-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Zhang S, Wang Y, Xiong X, et al Mechanistic insights into Hippo-YAP pathway activation for enhanced DFU healing. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2025;328(6):C1921–C1940. doi: 10.1152/ajpcell.01067.2024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Vu L, Xu F, Li T, et al Analysis of immune cell activation in patients with diabetes foot ulcer from the perspective of single cell. Eur J Med Res. 2024;29(1):606. doi: 10.1186/s40001-024-02179-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Yang Y, Li Y, Pan Q, et al Tibial cortex transverse transport accelerates wound healing via enhanced angiogenesis and immunomodulation. Bone Joint Res. 2022;11(4):189–199. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.114.BJR-2021-0364.R1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Nie X, Kuang X, Liu G, et al Tibial cortex transverse transport facilitating healing in patients with recalcitrant non-diabetic leg ulcers. J Orthop Translat. 2020;27:1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jot.2020.11.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Qin W, Liu K, Su H, et al Tibial cortex transverse transport promotes ischemic diabetic foot ulcer healing via enhanced angiogenesis and inflammation modulation in a novel rat model. Eur J Med Res. 2024;29(1):155. doi: 10.1186/s40001-024-01752-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Yuan Y, Ding X, Jing Z, et al. Modified tibial transverse transport technique for the treatment of ischemic diabetic foot ulcer in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Orthop Translat, 2021, 26: 29: 100-105.
  • 44.Kheiralla ZM, Maklad SS, Ashour SM, et al Association of complement C3 and interleukin-1 with foot infections in diabetic patients. Eur J Microbiol Immunol (Bp) 2012;2(3):220–230. doi: 10.1556/EuJMI.2.2012.3.8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.李新杰, 周玉森, 孔艳华, 等 糖尿病足溃疡老年患者免疫因子水平变化的研究. 中国免疫学杂志. 2022;38(15):1883–1886. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery are provided here courtesy of Sichuan University

RESOURCES