中华创伤杂志
中華創傷雜誌
중화창상잡지
Chinese Journal of Traumatology
2013年
1期
53-56
,共4页
外固定器%骨折固定术,髓内%胫腓骨骨折
外固定器%骨摺固定術,髓內%脛腓骨骨摺
외고정기%골절고정술,수내%경비골골절
External fixators%Fracture fixation,intramedullary%Tibiofibular fractures
目的 比较外固定支架和带锁髓内钉内固定治疗胫腓骨骨折的疗效. 方法 选择121例胫腓骨骨折患者,根据手术方式不同分为外固定支架组(56例)和带锁髓内钉组(65例).比较两组患者术后优良率、术中出血量、手术时间、术后肿胀消退时间、住院时间、骨折愈合时间、去除内固定时间及术后并发症发生情况. 结果 外固定支架组术后优良率为88％,带锁髓内钉组为89％ (P ＞0.05).外固定支架组术中出血量、手术时间、术后消肿时间和住院时间较带锁髓内钉组明显减少或者缩短(P＜0.01).而带锁髓内钉组的骨折愈合时间和去除内固定时间较外固定支架组明显缩短(P＜0.01).外固定支架组并发症发生率为11％,而带锁髓内钉组并发症发生率为28％ (P ＜0.05). 结论 外固定支架和带锁髓内钉治疗胫腓骨骨折均有良好的临床疗效.相对带锁髓内钉,外固定支架治疗对组织损伤更小,更有利于术后恢复,而带锁髓内钉治疗更有利于骨折的愈合.
目的 比較外固定支架和帶鎖髓內釘內固定治療脛腓骨骨摺的療效. 方法 選擇121例脛腓骨骨摺患者,根據手術方式不同分為外固定支架組(56例)和帶鎖髓內釘組(65例).比較兩組患者術後優良率、術中齣血量、手術時間、術後腫脹消退時間、住院時間、骨摺愈閤時間、去除內固定時間及術後併髮癥髮生情況. 結果 外固定支架組術後優良率為88％,帶鎖髓內釘組為89％ (P ＞0.05).外固定支架組術中齣血量、手術時間、術後消腫時間和住院時間較帶鎖髓內釘組明顯減少或者縮短(P＜0.01).而帶鎖髓內釘組的骨摺愈閤時間和去除內固定時間較外固定支架組明顯縮短(P＜0.01).外固定支架組併髮癥髮生率為11％,而帶鎖髓內釘組併髮癥髮生率為28％ (P ＜0.05). 結論 外固定支架和帶鎖髓內釘治療脛腓骨骨摺均有良好的臨床療效.相對帶鎖髓內釘,外固定支架治療對組織損傷更小,更有利于術後恢複,而帶鎖髓內釘治療更有利于骨摺的愈閤.
목적 비교외고정지가화대쇄수내정내고정치료경비골골절적료효. 방법 선택121례경비골골절환자,근거수술방식불동분위외고정지가조(56례)화대쇄수내정조(65례).비교량조환자술후우량솔、술중출혈량、수술시간、술후종창소퇴시간、주원시간、골절유합시간、거제내고정시간급술후병발증발생정황. 결과 외고정지가조술후우량솔위88％,대쇄수내정조위89％ (P ＞0.05).외고정지가조술중출혈량、수술시간、술후소종시간화주원시간교대쇄수내정조명현감소혹자축단(P＜0.01).이대쇄수내정조적골절유합시간화거제내고정시간교외고정지가조명현축단(P＜0.01).외고정지가조병발증발생솔위11％,이대쇄수내정조병발증발생솔위28％ (P ＜0.05). 결론 외고정지가화대쇄수내정치료경비골골절균유량호적림상료효.상대대쇄수내정,외고정지가치료대조직손상경소,경유리우술후회복,이대쇄수내정치료경유리우골절적유합.
Objective To compare curative effect of tibiofibular fractures treated by external fixation device and interlocking intramedullary nail.Methods A total of 121 patients with tibiofibular fractures were included in the study and were divided into external fixator group (56 patients) and interlocking intramedullary nail group (65 patients),according to diverse surgical approaches.The two groups were compared in indices of postoperative good-excellent rate,intraoperative blood loss,operation time,subsided time of postoperative swelling,hospital stay,fracture healing time,time of fixation removal and incidence of postoperative complications.Results The postoperative excellence rate in external fixator group and interlocking intramedullary nail group was 88％ and 89％,respectively (P ＞ 0.05).Compared with interlocking intramedullary nail group,the intraoperative blood loss was reduced more in external fixator group,with more evidently shortened operation time,subsided time of postoperative swelling and hospital stay (P ＜ 0.01).Fracture healing time and time of fixation removal,however,were significantly shorter in the interlocking intramedullary nail group than those in the external fixator group (P ＜ 0.01).Incidence of postoperative complications was 11％ in the external fixator group and 28％ in the interlocking intramedullary nail group (P ＜0.05).Conclusions External fixation device and interlocking intramedullary nail are both effective in treatment of tibial and fibular fractures.External fixation device with less damage to tissue is relatively more helpful to postoperative recovery.On the contrary,the interlocking intramedullary nail is relatively more conducive to fracture healing.
