中国组织工程研究
中國組織工程研究
중국조직공정연구
Journal of Clinical Rehabilitative Tissue Engineering Research
2012年
52期
9712-9716
,共5页
固定衬垫%活动衬垫%膝关节成形术%骨性关节炎%膝关节功能%人工关节
固定襯墊%活動襯墊%膝關節成形術%骨性關節炎%膝關節功能%人工關節
고정츤점%활동츤점%슬관절성형술%골성관절염%슬관절공능%인공관절
背景:对于近期活动衬垫型和固定衬垫型全膝关节置换后患膝关节功能改善情况目前专家意见并不一致.
目的:比较活动衬垫型和固定衬垫型全膝关节置换的近期临床效果.
方法:90例膝关节骨性关节炎患者行全膝关节置换,其中活动衬垫型全膝关节置换43例,固定衬垫型全膝关节置换47例.分析患者膝关节置换前、置换后1,3,6个月及1年时术膝的膝关节评分、疼痛评分、功能评分、髌骨评分和膝关节活动度,两组置换前各指标差异无显著性意义.
结果与结论:全膝关节置换后1,3个月,两组患者的膝关节评分、疼痛评分、功能评分、髌骨评分比较,差异无显著性意义(P>0.05);置换后6个月及1年时术膝的膝关节评分、疼痛评分、功能评分、髌骨评分中活动衬垫组较固定衬垫组明显进步(P<0.05).说明活动衬垫型和固定衬垫型全膝关节置换后患膝关节功能明显改善,且近期结果显示活动衬垫型效果更令人满意.
揹景:對于近期活動襯墊型和固定襯墊型全膝關節置換後患膝關節功能改善情況目前專傢意見併不一緻.
目的:比較活動襯墊型和固定襯墊型全膝關節置換的近期臨床效果.
方法:90例膝關節骨性關節炎患者行全膝關節置換,其中活動襯墊型全膝關節置換43例,固定襯墊型全膝關節置換47例.分析患者膝關節置換前、置換後1,3,6箇月及1年時術膝的膝關節評分、疼痛評分、功能評分、髕骨評分和膝關節活動度,兩組置換前各指標差異無顯著性意義.
結果與結論:全膝關節置換後1,3箇月,兩組患者的膝關節評分、疼痛評分、功能評分、髕骨評分比較,差異無顯著性意義(P>0.05);置換後6箇月及1年時術膝的膝關節評分、疼痛評分、功能評分、髕骨評分中活動襯墊組較固定襯墊組明顯進步(P<0.05).說明活動襯墊型和固定襯墊型全膝關節置換後患膝關節功能明顯改善,且近期結果顯示活動襯墊型效果更令人滿意.
배경:대우근기활동츤점형화고정츤점형전슬관절치환후환슬관절공능개선정황목전전가의견병불일치.
목적:비교활동츤점형화고정츤점형전슬관절치환적근기림상효과.
방법:90례슬관절골성관절염환자행전슬관절치환,기중활동츤점형전슬관절치환43례,고정츤점형전슬관절치환47례.분석환자슬관절치환전、치환후1,3,6개월급1년시술슬적슬관절평분、동통평분、공능평분、빈골평분화슬관절활동도,량조치환전각지표차이무현저성의의.
결과여결론:전슬관절치환후1,3개월,량조환자적슬관절평분、동통평분、공능평분、빈골평분비교,차이무현저성의의(P>0.05);치환후6개월급1년시술슬적슬관절평분、동통평분、공능평분、빈골평분중활동츤점조교고정츤점조명현진보(P<0.05).설명활동츤점형화고정츤점형전슬관절치환후환슬관절공능명현개선,차근기결과현시활동츤점형효과경령인만의.
BACKGROUND:Recently, there are different opinions for the knee function improvement after fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty. @@@@OBJECTIVE:To compare the clinical outcomes between fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing for total knee arthroplasty. @@@@METHODS:Ninety patients with osteoarthritis were treated by fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty (n=47) or mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty (n=43). Al the data were analyzed including the total knee score, pain score, patient function score, patel ar score and motion of the knee joint before total knee arthroplasty, 1, 3 and 6 months and 1 year after total knee arthroplasty, and there was no significant different before replacement between two groups. @@@@RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:There was no significant difference between the two groups in the total knee score, pain score, patient function score and patel ar score at 1 and 3 months after replacement (P>0.05). After 6 months and 1 year, the total knee score, pain score, patient function score and patel ar score in the mobile-bearing group were significantly higher than those in the fixed-bearing group (P<0.05). It indicates that both mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty can improve the knee function, and recent study found that the effect of mobile-bearing is better than that of fixed-bearing.