中国实用医药
中國實用醫藥
중국실용의약
CHINA PRACTICAL MEDICAL
2014年
3期
21-22
,共2页
全髋关节置换术%人工股骨头置换术%临床疗效%并发症
全髖關節置換術%人工股骨頭置換術%臨床療效%併髮癥
전관관절치환술%인공고골두치환술%림상료효%병발증
Total hip arthroplasty%Hemiarthroplasty%Clinical efficacy%Complications
目的：评价分析股骨颈骨折治疗术的临床效果,为保证临床疗效提供理论依据。方法将本院股骨颈骨折需要实施髋关节置换患者60例,按照手术方法分为两组,分别于术后2个月、4个月根据Harris评分标准比较分析两组患者的临床疗效,并比较两组患者的手术时间,术中出血量,下床活动时间及术后并发症,以期评价两组手术的优越性。结果 THA组在手术时间、下床活动时间及术后2个月和4个月的Harrisde得分较FHA组差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)；THA组术中出血量较FHA组差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)；两组患者优、良得分比较差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.267, P=0.398 VSχ2=2.222, P=0.116),但THA组临床总疗效较FHA组有显著性优越性(χ2=4.356, P=0.036)；两组患者在感染和下肢静脉血栓指标差异无统计学意义(χ2=1.013, P=0.306 VSχ2=2.069, P=0.246)；但FHA组在术后脱位较THA组严重,差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.356, P=0.049)。结论全髋关节置换术在临床总疗效、骨功能恢复及其术后并发症方面均较人工股骨头置换术有显著优越性,值得临床推广。
目的：評價分析股骨頸骨摺治療術的臨床效果,為保證臨床療效提供理論依據。方法將本院股骨頸骨摺需要實施髖關節置換患者60例,按照手術方法分為兩組,分彆于術後2箇月、4箇月根據Harris評分標準比較分析兩組患者的臨床療效,併比較兩組患者的手術時間,術中齣血量,下床活動時間及術後併髮癥,以期評價兩組手術的優越性。結果 THA組在手術時間、下床活動時間及術後2箇月和4箇月的Harrisde得分較FHA組差異有統計學意義(P<0.05)；THA組術中齣血量較FHA組差異有統計學意義(P<0.001)；兩組患者優、良得分比較差異無統計學意義(χ2=0.267, P=0.398 VSχ2=2.222, P=0.116),但THA組臨床總療效較FHA組有顯著性優越性(χ2=4.356, P=0.036)；兩組患者在感染和下肢靜脈血栓指標差異無統計學意義(χ2=1.013, P=0.306 VSχ2=2.069, P=0.246)；但FHA組在術後脫位較THA組嚴重,差異有統計學意義(χ2=4.356, P=0.049)。結論全髖關節置換術在臨床總療效、骨功能恢複及其術後併髮癥方麵均較人工股骨頭置換術有顯著優越性,值得臨床推廣。
목적：평개분석고골경골절치료술적림상효과,위보증림상료효제공이론의거。방법장본원고골경골절수요실시관관절치환환자60례,안조수술방법분위량조,분별우술후2개월、4개월근거Harris평분표준비교분석량조환자적림상료효,병비교량조환자적수술시간,술중출혈량,하상활동시간급술후병발증,이기평개량조수술적우월성。결과 THA조재수술시간、하상활동시간급술후2개월화4개월적Harrisde득분교FHA조차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)；THA조술중출혈량교FHA조차이유통계학의의(P<0.001)；량조환자우、량득분비교차이무통계학의의(χ2=0.267, P=0.398 VSχ2=2.222, P=0.116),단THA조림상총료효교FHA조유현저성우월성(χ2=4.356, P=0.036)；량조환자재감염화하지정맥혈전지표차이무통계학의의(χ2=1.013, P=0.306 VSχ2=2.069, P=0.246)；단FHA조재술후탈위교THA조엄중,차이유통계학의의(χ2=4.356, P=0.049)。결론전관관절치환술재림상총료효、골공능회복급기술후병발증방면균교인공고골두치환술유현저우월성,치득림상추엄。
Objective To evaluate the clinical effect of femoral neck fracture surgery and try to explore hip arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty excellent,providing a theoretical basis for the assurance of clinical efficacy. Methods In the future I need to implement hospital femoral neck fracture hip replacement in 60 patients,divided into two groups according to surgical. Methods where total hip arthroplasty group(THA group)30 cases,hemiarthroplasty group(FHA)group of 30 cases.After 2 months,the comparative analysis of the clinical efficacy of the two groups of patients were 4 months according to Harris score,and two groups were compared operative time,blood loss, and postoperative complications ambulation time to evaluate two operative superiority. Results THA group in operative time, time to get out of bed and after 2 months and 4 months Harrisde score FHA has significant difference (P<0.05) compared with group;THA group than the FHA group blood loss was significant difference(P<0.001);groups were excellent,good score showed no significant difference (χ2=0.267, P=0.398VSχ2=2.222, P=0.116), but the overall clinical efficacy FHA THA group were significantly higher than group superiority (χ2=4.356, P=0.036);groups of patients there was no significant difference in infection and deep vein thrombosis index (χ2=1.013, P=0.306VSχ2=2.069, P=0.246);but FHA group in the postoperative severe dislocation significant difference compared with the THA group (χ2=4.356, P=0.049). Conclusion Total hip arthroplasty in the general clinical efficacy,and postoperative functional recovery of bone complications compared hemiarthroplasty significant advantages, worthy of promotion.
