CAJ | 학술논문

目的比较股骨近端髓内钉(proximal femoral nail,PFN)与防旋股骨近端髓内钉(proximal femoral nail antirotation,PFNA)两种内固定方法治疗股骨转子间骨折的效果.方法回顾性分析PFN和PFNA治疗股骨转子间骨折患者233例,其中PFN组188例,PFNA组45例.对两组患者的手术资料和术后功能恢复情况进行比较.结果平均随访22.8个月.两组骨折均获得愈合.两组切口长度、手术时间、术中出血量差异具有统计学意义.PFN组优良率为89.9%,PFNA组优良率为91.1%,差异无统计学意义(X<'2>=0.06,P>0.05).PFN组防旋钉退出2例,1例发生髋螺钉切割,继而发生髋内翻畸形.PFNA组未发生类似并发症.结论两种股骨近端髓内钉对股骨转子间骨折均能起到良好的治疗作用.PFNA较PFN手术时间更短,出血量更少,对老年骨质疏松患者更具优势.
목적 비교고골근단수내정(proximal femoral nail,PFN)여방선고골근단수내정(proximal femoral nail antirotation,PFNA)량충내고정방법치료고골전자간골절적효과.방법 회고성분석PFN화PFNA치료고골전자간골절환자233례,기중PFN조188례,PFNA조45례.대량조환자적수술자료화술후공능회복정황진행비교.결과 평균수방22.8개월.량조골절균획득유합.량조절구장도、수술시간、술중출혈량차이구유통계학의의.PFN조우량솔위89.9%,PFNA조우량솔위91.1%,차이무통계학의의(X<'2>=0.06,P>0.05).PFN조방선정퇴출2례,1례발생관라정절할,계이발생관내번기형.PFNA조미발생유사병발증.결론 량충고골근단수내정대고골전자간골절균능기도량호적치료작용.PFNA교PFN수술시간경단,출혈량경소,대노년골질소송환자경구우세.
Objective To compare the treatment effectiveness of AO/ASIF proximal femoral nail (PFN) and proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) in treatment of intertrochanterie fractures. Methods A retrospective study was done on 233 patients with intertroehanteric fractures treated from August 2004 to December 2006. The patients were divided into PFN group (188 patients) and PFNA group (45 patients) for comparing operative procedures and postoperative functional recovery. Results There was statistical difference in aspects of incision length, blood loss and operation time between two groups. The follow-up for 22.8 months showed excellence rate of 89.9% in PFN group and 91.1% in PFNA group, with statistical difference (X2 = 0.06, P > 0.05). There occurred hip varus in one patient and antirotation nail cutting-out in two in PFN group, which was not found in PFNA group. Conclusion PFN and PFNA are both good choices for treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. Compared with PFN, PFNA has more advantages in reducing operation time and blood loss especially for the eider patients with osteoporosis.