中国医师进修杂志
中國醫師進脩雜誌
중국의사진수잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF POSTGRADUATES OF MEDICINE
2013年
11期
8-11
,共4页
肩锁关节%脱位%Endobutton钢板%锁骨钩钢板
肩鎖關節%脫位%Endobutton鋼闆%鎖骨鉤鋼闆
견쇄관절%탈위%Endobutton강판%쇄골구강판
Acromioclavicular joint%Dislocations%Endobutton plate%Clavicle hook plate
目的 比较三Endobutton钢板与锁骨钩钢板治疗肩锁关节脱位的临床疗效.方法 2008年1月至2011年1月共收治肩锁关节脱位患者42例,按照治疗方法不同分为三Endobutton钢板组(EB组)和锁骨钩钢板组(CH组),EB组20例,采用三Endobutton钢板治疗,CH组22例,采用锁骨钩钢板治疗.对两组患者围手术期指标[手术时间、术中失血量及术后第3天疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分]、术后12个月肩关节功能评分和术后并发症进行比较.结果 EB组与CH组比较,手术时间较长[(113.6±25.3)min比(62.3±17.8) min],术中失血量较大[(152.7±15.2) ml比(93.1±18.9) ml],差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05)；两组术后第3天VAS评分比较差异无统计学意义(P＞ 0.05);EB组患者术后12个月肩关节功能评分优良率优于CH组,但差异无统计学意义[95.0％(19/20)比81.8％(18/22),P＞0.05];EB组术后肩关节疼痛、僵硬发生率明显低于CH组[20.0 ％(4/20)比50.0％(11/22)、20.0％ (4/20)比54.5％(12/22),P＜ 0.05],但在切口感染方面,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 三Endobutton钢板治疗肩锁关节脱位与锁骨钩钢板比较,手术较复杂,且术中失血量较多,但其术后并发症较少.
目的 比較三Endobutton鋼闆與鎖骨鉤鋼闆治療肩鎖關節脫位的臨床療效.方法 2008年1月至2011年1月共收治肩鎖關節脫位患者42例,按照治療方法不同分為三Endobutton鋼闆組(EB組)和鎖骨鉤鋼闆組(CH組),EB組20例,採用三Endobutton鋼闆治療,CH組22例,採用鎖骨鉤鋼闆治療.對兩組患者圍手術期指標[手術時間、術中失血量及術後第3天疼痛視覺模擬量錶(VAS)評分]、術後12箇月肩關節功能評分和術後併髮癥進行比較.結果 EB組與CH組比較,手術時間較長[(113.6±25.3)min比(62.3±17.8) min],術中失血量較大[(152.7±15.2) ml比(93.1±18.9) ml],差異均有統計學意義(P＜0.05)；兩組術後第3天VAS評分比較差異無統計學意義(P＞ 0.05);EB組患者術後12箇月肩關節功能評分優良率優于CH組,但差異無統計學意義[95.0％(19/20)比81.8％(18/22),P＞0.05];EB組術後肩關節疼痛、僵硬髮生率明顯低于CH組[20.0 ％(4/20)比50.0％(11/22)、20.0％ (4/20)比54.5％(12/22),P＜ 0.05],但在切口感染方麵,兩組比較差異無統計學意義(P＞0.05).結論 三Endobutton鋼闆治療肩鎖關節脫位與鎖骨鉤鋼闆比較,手術較複雜,且術中失血量較多,但其術後併髮癥較少.
목적 비교삼Endobutton강판여쇄골구강판치료견쇄관절탈위적림상료효.방법 2008년1월지2011년1월공수치견쇄관절탈위환자42례,안조치료방법불동분위삼Endobutton강판조(EB조)화쇄골구강판조(CH조),EB조20례,채용삼Endobutton강판치료,CH조22례,채용쇄골구강판치료.대량조환자위수술기지표[수술시간、술중실혈량급술후제3천동통시각모의량표(VAS)평분]、술후12개월견관절공능평분화술후병발증진행비교.결과 EB조여CH조비교,수술시간교장[(113.6±25.3)min비(62.3±17.8) min],술중실혈량교대[(152.7±15.2) ml비(93.1±18.9) ml],차이균유통계학의의(P＜0.05)；량조술후제3천VAS평분비교차이무통계학의의(P＞ 0.05);EB조환자술후12개월견관절공능평분우량솔우우CH조,단차이무통계학의의[95.0％(19/20)비81.8％(18/22),P＞0.05];EB조술후견관절동통、강경발생솔명현저우CH조[20.0 ％(4/20)비50.0％(11/22)、20.0％ (4/20)비54.5％(12/22),P＜ 0.05],단재절구감염방면,량조비교차이무통계학의의(P＞0.05).결론 삼Endobutton강판치료견쇄관절탈위여쇄골구강판비교,수술교복잡,차술중실혈량교다,단기술후병발증교소.
Objective To compare the clinical effect of three Endobutton plates and clavicular hook plate in treatment of acromioclavicular joint dislocation.Methods Forty-two patients with acromioclavicular joint dislocation were randomly divided into EB group (20 patients) who were treated with three Endobutton plates and CH group (22 patients) who were treated with clavicular hook plate from January 2008 to January 2011.Perioperative index (operation time,blood loss and VAS scores on the third day postoperatively),Karlsson shoulder joint function scores and postoperative complication were compared.Results The operation time and blood loss in EB group were significantly higher than those in CH group [(113.6 ± 25.3)minvs.(62.3±17.8)min,(152.7±15.2) mlvs.(93.1±18.9)ml,P＜0.O5].However,therehadno significant difference for VAS scores on the third day postoperatively between two groups (P ＞ 0.05).EB group was superior to CH group for shoulder joint function scores on the twelfth month postoperatively,but there had no significant difference [95.0％ (19/20) vs.81.8％ (18/22),P ＞ 0.05].The incidence rate of shoulder joint pain and stiffness in EB group were significant lower than those in CH group[20.0 ％ (4/20) vs.50.0％(11/22),20.0％(4/20) vs.54.5％(12/22),P ＜ 0.05].The incidence rate of incision infection in two groups had no significant difference (P ＞ 0.05).Conclusions Compared with clavicular hook plate,three Endobutton plates fixation is complex and consequently with more blood loss.However,three Endobutton plates fixation have advantage in clinical effect and complication.
