CAJ | 학술논문

目的：分析开放性胫腓骨骨折的治疗方法，比较锁定钢板内固定和交锁髓内钉内固定治疗开放性胫腓骨骨折的临床疗效。方法纳入骨科接受治疗的开放性胫腓骨骨折患者65例为研究对象，均采用彻底清创后内固定治疗，波及关节面骨折的35例患者给予锁定钢板内固定治疗（锁定钢板组），胫腓骨骨干部位骨折的30例患者给予交锁髓内钉内固定（交锁髓内钉组）。术后随访1年，观察两组患者手术时间、骨折愈合时间、术后并发症，并采用 Johner-Wruhs 标准评价患肢功能恢复情况。结果锁定钢板组手术时间为（152．36±35．28）min ，骨折愈合时间为（120．78±15．22）d ；Johner-Wruhs 评分为（80．68±5．12）分，有2例发生感染；交锁髓内钉组手术时间为（126．72±28．95）min ，骨折愈合时间为（122．92±12．73）d ，Johner-Wruhs 评分为（81．05±4．96）分，有5例发生感染。两组手术时间和感染差异有统计学意义（P＜0．05）。结论采用锁定钢板内固定和交锁髓内钉内固定治疗开放性胫腓骨骨折均可获得良好的疗效，可根据不同骨折类型选择不同的内固定方式进行治疗。
목적：분석개방성경비골골절적치료방법，비교쇄정강판내고정화교쇄수내정내고정치료개방성경비골골절적림상료효。방법납입골과접수치료적개방성경비골골절환자65례위연구대상，균채용철저청창후내고정치료，파급관절면골절적35례환자급여쇄정강판내고정치료（쇄정강판조），경비골골간부위골절적30례환자급여교쇄수내정내고정（교쇄수내정조）。술후수방1년，관찰량조환자수술시간、골절유합시간、술후병발증，병채용 Johner-Wruhs 표준평개환지공능회복정황。결과쇄정강판조수술시간위（152．36±35．28）min ，골절유합시간위（120．78±15．22）d ；Johner-Wruhs 평분위（80．68±5．12）분，유2례발생감염；교쇄수내정조수술시간위（126．72±28．95）min ，골절유합시간위（122．92±12．73）d ，Johner-Wruhs 평분위（81．05±4．96）분，유5례발생감염。량조수술시간화감염차이유통계학의의（P＜0．05）。결론채용쇄정강판내고정화교쇄수내정내고정치료개방성경비골골절균가획득량호적료효，가근거불동골절류형선택불동적내고정방식진행치료。
Objective To evaluate and compare the effects of locking plate fixationopen and interlocking intr -amedullary nail for treatment in open tibiofibula fracture .Methods Collected open tibiofibula fracture patients 65 ca-ses as the research objects .35 cases of intra - articular fracture were treated with internal locking plate fixation (loc-king plate group) ,30 cases of tibiofibula fractures were treated with interlocking intramedullary nail (interlocking in-tramedullary nail group) .In the follow up of 1 year ,observation of two groups of patients operation time ,fracture u-nion time ,postoperative complications ,And used the Johner - Wruhs standard to evaluate the recovery of limb func-tion .Results Compared with Locking plate group ,interlocking intramedullary nail group operation time was (126 .72 ± 28 .95)min ,fracture union time was (122 .92 ± 12 .73)d ,Johner-Wruhs score was(81 .05 ± 4 .96) ,and 5 ca-ses were infected .Locking plate group each datas were (152 .36 ± 35 .28)min ,(120 .78 ± 15 .22)d ,(80 .68 ± 5 .12)and 2 cases .There were significant statistical difference in operation time and infection rate (P< 0 .05) .Conclusion This two operation methods colud achieve a good effect ,Selection which one method can accord to different fracture types .