CAJ | 학술논문

目的比较两种髌骨骨折内固定器的疗效。方法手术治疗髌骨骨折208例，其中113例采用镍钛聚髌器内固定，95例采用可调节髌骨骨折整复器内固定。结果镍钛聚髌器内固定组：优99例，良10例，中2例，差2例；可调节髌骨骨折整复器内固定组：优83例，良8例，中2例，差2例。两组间差异无显著性。结论镍钛聚髌器和可调节髌骨骨折整复器均有良好的疗效。
목적비교량충빈골골절내고정기적료효。방법수술치료빈골골절208례，기중113례채용얼태취빈기내고정，95례채용가조절빈골골절정복기내고정。결과얼태취빈기내고정조：우99례，량10례，중2례，차2례；가조절빈골골절정복기내고정조：우83례，량8례，중2례，차2례。량조간차이무현저성。결론얼태취빈기화가조절빈골골절정복기균유량호적료효。
Objective　To compare the clinical effect of two internal fixation devices for the treatment of patella fracture. Methods　208 cases of patella fracture were received, among them 113 cases were treated by the Nickel-Titanium patella fixator and the other 95 cases by the adjustable patella fracture reduce device for internal fixation. Results　99 ,10,2 and 2 cases obtained excellent, good, favorable and poor results, respectively in Nickel-Titanium patella fixation group; and 83, 8, 2 and 2 cases obtained excellent, good, favorable and poor results, respectively in adjustable patella group.There was no significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion　Both the Nickel-Titanium patella fixation and the adjustable patella fracture reduce device have the satisfactory effect for treatment of patella fracture.