中国医疗设备
中國醫療設備
중국의료설비
CHINA MEDICAL EQUIPMENT
2014年
11期
43-45
,共3页
阿卜杜瓦伊提·阿卜杜拉%杜曼·吐鲁木汗%史翀%穆哈买提
阿蔔杜瓦伊提·阿蔔杜拉%杜曼·吐魯木汗%史翀%穆哈買提
아복두와이제·아복두랍%두만·토로목한%사충%목합매제
全髋关节发育不良%骨水泥型假体%生物型假体
全髖關節髮育不良%骨水泥型假體%生物型假體
전관관절발육불량%골수니형가체%생물형가체
development dysplasia hip%cemented prosthesis%biological prosthesis
目的：对比骨水泥型与生物型假体在髋关节发育不良患者中的疗效。方法将行全髋关节置换术的髋关节发育不良患者80例随机分为两组，研究组40例采用生物型假体进行置换术，对照组40例采用骨水泥型假体进行置换术。从手术时间、出血量、假体存活率、Harris评分等方面评价两组手术的安全性及疗效。结果研究组手术时间为（98.7±18.9）min，对照组为（140.7±51.9）min，差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。研究组出血量为（280.0±60）mL，对照组为（360.0±100）mL，差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。研究组假体存活率为95%，对照组为82.5%，差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。末次随访时研究组平均Harris评分为（91.7±9.8）分，对照组为（82.9±11.3）分，差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。结论对于髋关节发育不良患者，采用生物型假体行全髋关节置换术具有稳定性高、中远期疗效满意的优点，值得临床推广。
目的：對比骨水泥型與生物型假體在髖關節髮育不良患者中的療效。方法將行全髖關節置換術的髖關節髮育不良患者80例隨機分為兩組，研究組40例採用生物型假體進行置換術，對照組40例採用骨水泥型假體進行置換術。從手術時間、齣血量、假體存活率、Harris評分等方麵評價兩組手術的安全性及療效。結果研究組手術時間為（98.7±18.9）min，對照組為（140.7±51.9）min，差異具有統計學意義（P<0.05）。研究組齣血量為（280.0±60）mL，對照組為（360.0±100）mL，差異具有統計學意義（P<0.05）。研究組假體存活率為95%，對照組為82.5%，差異具有統計學意義（P<0.05）。末次隨訪時研究組平均Harris評分為（91.7±9.8）分，對照組為（82.9±11.3）分，差異具有統計學意義（P<0.05）。結論對于髖關節髮育不良患者，採用生物型假體行全髖關節置換術具有穩定性高、中遠期療效滿意的優點，值得臨床推廣。
목적：대비골수니형여생물형가체재관관절발육불량환자중적료효。방법장행전관관절치환술적관관절발육불량환자80례수궤분위량조，연구조40례채용생물형가체진행치환술，대조조40례채용골수니형가체진행치환술。종수술시간、출혈량、가체존활솔、Harris평분등방면평개량조수술적안전성급료효。결과연구조수술시간위（98.7±18.9）min，대조조위（140.7±51.9）min，차이구유통계학의의（P<0.05）。연구조출혈량위（280.0±60）mL，대조조위（360.0±100）mL，차이구유통계학의의（P<0.05）。연구조가체존활솔위95%，대조조위82.5%，차이구유통계학의의（P<0.05）。말차수방시연구조평균Harris평분위（91.7±9.8）분，대조조위（82.9±11.3）분，차이구유통계학의의（P<0.05）。결론대우관관절발육불량환자，채용생물형가체행전관관절치환술구유은정성고、중원기료효만의적우점，치득림상추엄。
Objective To compare the effect of cemented prosthesis and biological prosthesis in the treatment of patients with development dysplasia hip (DDH).Methods 80 patients with DDH who would undergo total hip arthroplasty were randomly divided into research group (40 cases) and control group (40 cases). The total hip arthroplasty of research group was conducted with biological prosthesis while that of control group was conducted with cemented prosthesis. Then the safety and effectiveness of research group were compared with those of control group from the aspects of operation time, bleeding quantity, survival rate of prosthesis and Harris score.Results The average operation time of research group was (98.7±18.9) min while that of control group was (140.7±51.9) min. The average bleeding quantity of research group was (280.0±60) mL while that of control group was (360.0±100) mL. The survival rate of prosthesis of research group was 95% while that of control group was 82.5%. The Harris score calculated at the last follow-up of prosthesis of research group was (91.7±9.8) while that of control group was (82.9±11.3). There were signiifcant differences between research group and control group in operation time, bleeding quantity, survival rate of prosthesis and Harris score.Conclusion Total hip arthroplasty conducted with biological prosthesis which owns advantages such as high stability and ideal mid-term and long-term curative effect should be promoted in the treatment of patients with DDH.
