中国组织工程研究
中國組織工程研究
중국조직공정연구
Journal of Clinical Rehabilitative Tissue Engineering Research
2014年
35期
5611-5615
,共5页
植入物%骨植入物%股骨转子间骨折%内固定%股骨近端防旋髓内钉%动力髋螺钉
植入物%骨植入物%股骨轉子間骨摺%內固定%股骨近耑防鏇髓內釘%動力髖螺釘
식입물%골식입물%고골전자간골절%내고정%고골근단방선수내정%동력관라정
femoral fractures%internal fixators%fracture healing%hemoglobins
背景:对于年轻患者股骨转子间骨折,大部分内固定方法均能提供有效而坚固的固定;而对于老年性骨质疏松性转子间骨折类型,何种内固定的疗效最佳尚在争论。目的:比较股骨近端防旋髓内钉与动力髋螺钉置入内固定修复股骨转子间骨折的临床疗效。方法:选取2010年1月至2013年1月苏州市相城人民医院收治,采用股骨近端防旋髓内钉或动力髋螺钉治疗股骨转子间骨折患者的临床资料。根据纳入标准,最终140例146髋纳入研究,其中股骨近端防旋髓内钉组70例(74髋),动力髋螺钉组70例(72髋),两组患者术前一般资料比较差异无显著性意义(P>0.05),具有可比性。比较两组患者手术时间、失血量、平均住院时间、术后下地时间、围手术期血红蛋白丢失量、术后并发症、骨折愈合时间及髋关节Harris评分等指标以评估疗效。结果与结论:140例患者均获随访,随访时间8-16个月,所有患者切口均Ⅰ期愈合。相比动力髋螺钉组,股骨近端防旋髓内钉组在手术时间、术中失血量、术后下地行走时间、平均住院天数方面均更具优势,差异有显著性意义(P<0.05),但两组在围手术期血红蛋白丢失、骨折愈合时间、术后Harris评分等方面差异无显著性意义(P>0.05)。提示股骨近端防旋髓内钉与动力髋螺钉置入内固定修复股骨转子间骨折均能获得较满意的临床疗效,但股骨近端防旋髓内钉具有手术时间短、失血量少、平均住院时间短、术后下地时间早及术后并发症少等优点。
揹景:對于年輕患者股骨轉子間骨摺,大部分內固定方法均能提供有效而堅固的固定;而對于老年性骨質疏鬆性轉子間骨摺類型,何種內固定的療效最佳尚在爭論。目的:比較股骨近耑防鏇髓內釘與動力髖螺釘置入內固定脩複股骨轉子間骨摺的臨床療效。方法:選取2010年1月至2013年1月囌州市相城人民醫院收治,採用股骨近耑防鏇髓內釘或動力髖螺釘治療股骨轉子間骨摺患者的臨床資料。根據納入標準,最終140例146髖納入研究,其中股骨近耑防鏇髓內釘組70例(74髖),動力髖螺釘組70例(72髖),兩組患者術前一般資料比較差異無顯著性意義(P>0.05),具有可比性。比較兩組患者手術時間、失血量、平均住院時間、術後下地時間、圍手術期血紅蛋白丟失量、術後併髮癥、骨摺愈閤時間及髖關節Harris評分等指標以評估療效。結果與結論:140例患者均穫隨訪,隨訪時間8-16箇月,所有患者切口均Ⅰ期愈閤。相比動力髖螺釘組,股骨近耑防鏇髓內釘組在手術時間、術中失血量、術後下地行走時間、平均住院天數方麵均更具優勢,差異有顯著性意義(P<0.05),但兩組在圍手術期血紅蛋白丟失、骨摺愈閤時間、術後Harris評分等方麵差異無顯著性意義(P>0.05)。提示股骨近耑防鏇髓內釘與動力髖螺釘置入內固定脩複股骨轉子間骨摺均能穫得較滿意的臨床療效,但股骨近耑防鏇髓內釘具有手術時間短、失血量少、平均住院時間短、術後下地時間早及術後併髮癥少等優點。
배경:대우년경환자고골전자간골절,대부분내고정방법균능제공유효이견고적고정;이대우노년성골질소송성전자간골절류형,하충내고정적료효최가상재쟁론。목적:비교고골근단방선수내정여동력관라정치입내고정수복고골전자간골절적림상료효。방법:선취2010년1월지2013년1월소주시상성인민의원수치,채용고골근단방선수내정혹동력관라정치료고골전자간골절환자적림상자료。근거납입표준,최종140례146관납입연구,기중고골근단방선수내정조70례(74관),동력관라정조70례(72관),량조환자술전일반자료비교차이무현저성의의(P>0.05),구유가비성。비교량조환자수술시간、실혈량、평균주원시간、술후하지시간、위수술기혈홍단백주실량、술후병발증、골절유합시간급관관절Harris평분등지표이평고료효。결과여결론:140례환자균획수방,수방시간8-16개월,소유환자절구균Ⅰ기유합。상비동력관라정조,고골근단방선수내정조재수술시간、술중실혈량、술후하지행주시간、평균주원천수방면균경구우세,차이유현저성의의(P<0.05),단량조재위수술기혈홍단백주실、골절유합시간、술후Harris평분등방면차이무현저성의의(P>0.05)。제시고골근단방선수내정여동력관라정치입내고정수복고골전자간골절균능획득교만의적림상료효,단고골근단방선수내정구유수술시간단、실혈량소、평균주원시간단、술후하지시간조급술후병발증소등우점。
BACKGROUND:For younger patients with intertrochanteric fractures, many fixation methods can provide an effective and robust fixation, but for elderly patients with osteoporosis intertrochanteric fracture, there remains debate for which fixation method is optimum. OBJECTIVE:To compare the clinical outcomes of proximal femoral nail anti-rotation and dynamic hip screw in the repair of intertrochanteric fracture. METHODS:Clinical data of patients with intertrochanteric fracture treated by proximal femoral nail anti-rotation or dynamic hip screw at the Suzhou Xiangcheng People’s Hospital from January 2010 to January 2013 were selected. In accordance with the inclusion criteria, 140 patients (146 hips) were included, containing 70 patients in the proximal femoral nail anti-rotation group (74 hips) and 70 patients in the dynamic hip screw group (72 hips). No significant difference in preoperative general data was detected in patients of both groups (P>0.05), showing a comparability. Operative time, intra-operative blood loss, the average length of hospital stay, postoperative ambulation time, perioperative hemoglobin loss amount, postoperative complications, healing time, and Harris score were compared and evaluated in both groups. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:140 patients were fol owed up for 8-16 months. The incision was stage I healing. Compared with dynamic hip screw group, operative time, intra-operative blood loss, the average length of hospital stay, and postoperative ambulation time were better in the proximal femoral nail anti-rotation group (P<0.05). However, no significant differences in perioperative hemoglobin loss amount, healing time, and postoperative Harris score were visible in the both groups (P>0.05). These findings suggested that proximal femoral nail anti-rotation and dynamic hip screw in the repair of intertrochanteric fracture could obtain satisfactory clinical outcomes, but proximal femoral nail anti-rotation has some advantages such as short operative time, less blood loss, short mean hospital stay, early postoperative ambulation time and less postoperative complications.