河北医科大学学报
河北醫科大學學報
하북의과대학학보
JOURNAL OF HEBEI MEDICAL UNIVERSITY
2014年
6期
635-638
,共4页
董海鹏%高石军%窦砚%郑晓佐%左百军
董海鵬%高石軍%竇硯%鄭曉佐%左百軍
동해붕%고석군%두연%정효좌%좌백군
软骨,关节%富血小板血浆%修复外科手术
軟骨,關節%富血小闆血漿%脩複外科手術
연골,관절%부혈소판혈장%수복외과수술
cartilage,articular%platelet rich plasma%reconstructive surgical procedures
目的:探讨自体富血小板血浆( platelet rich plasma,PRP)修复兔膝关节软骨损伤后生物力学变化。方法构建兔膝关节软骨完整模型作为对照组,构建兔膝关节股骨负重区内侧软骨损伤模型,用自体PRP注入右膝作为PRP组,用生理盐水( normal saline,NS)注入左膝作为NS组,术后1、3、5周分别取材,观察软骨修复情况,用压敏片测试膝关节内、外侧关节面接触面积及压强。结果术后1、3、5周,大体观察新生软骨组织,PRP组均好于NS组,术后5周PRP组与对照组比较,胫股关节内、外侧接触面积及压强差异无统计学意义( P>0.05)。结论 PRP可以修复受损软骨,修复后膝关节软骨组织的接触面积及接触压力接近正常软骨组织。
目的:探討自體富血小闆血漿( platelet rich plasma,PRP)脩複兔膝關節軟骨損傷後生物力學變化。方法構建兔膝關節軟骨完整模型作為對照組,構建兔膝關節股骨負重區內側軟骨損傷模型,用自體PRP註入右膝作為PRP組,用生理鹽水( normal saline,NS)註入左膝作為NS組,術後1、3、5週分彆取材,觀察軟骨脩複情況,用壓敏片測試膝關節內、外側關節麵接觸麵積及壓彊。結果術後1、3、5週,大體觀察新生軟骨組織,PRP組均好于NS組,術後5週PRP組與對照組比較,脛股關節內、外側接觸麵積及壓彊差異無統計學意義( P>0.05)。結論 PRP可以脩複受損軟骨,脩複後膝關節軟骨組織的接觸麵積及接觸壓力接近正常軟骨組織。
목적:탐토자체부혈소판혈장( platelet rich plasma,PRP)수복토슬관절연골손상후생물역학변화。방법구건토슬관절연골완정모형작위대조조,구건토슬관절고골부중구내측연골손상모형,용자체PRP주입우슬작위PRP조,용생리염수( normal saline,NS)주입좌슬작위NS조,술후1、3、5주분별취재,관찰연골수복정황,용압민편측시슬관절내、외측관절면접촉면적급압강。결과술후1、3、5주,대체관찰신생연골조직,PRP조균호우NS조,술후5주PRP조여대조조비교,경고관절내、외측접촉면적급압강차이무통계학의의( P>0.05)。결론 PRP가이수복수손연골,수복후슬관절연골조직적접촉면적급접촉압력접근정상연골조직。
Objective To study the biomechanic characteristics of knee joint after cartilage repairing with platelet-rich plasma( PRP). Methods The models of cartilage injury on weight-bearing area in the medial femoral were constructed,and were respectively repaired by PRP and normal saline ( NS). The uninjured cartilages were regarded as control group. The repair of injured cartilage were examined,and the medial and lateral contact area and pressure of the knee joint were recorded 1,3,5 weeks postoperatively. Results The newly repaired cartilage was observed in PRP group,and the reparative effect was better than the NS group 1,3,5 weeks postoperatively. There were no significant difference in the fields of the contact area and pressure of the medial and lateral the tibiofemoral joint five weeks after operation between the PRP group and the control group( P>0 . 05 ). Conclusion The PRP was a potential factor for repairing injured cartilage. The contact area and pressure of the knee joint after repair by PRP were similar to the normal cartilage.