临床和实验医学杂志
臨床和實驗醫學雜誌
림상화실험의학잡지
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE
2015年
16期
1380-1382
,共3页
张清华%张光武%栗剑%刘家帮%阚金富%张昆%李冬
張清華%張光武%慄劍%劉傢幫%闞金富%張昆%李鼕
장청화%장광무%률검%류가방%감금부%장곤%리동
老年人%股骨颈骨折%半髋关节置换术%骨水泥型%生物型
老年人%股骨頸骨摺%半髖關節置換術%骨水泥型%生物型
노년인%고골경골절%반관관절치환술%골수니형%생물형
Elderly patients%Femoral neck fracture%Hemiarthroplasty%Cemented%Uncemented
目的:比较骨水泥型和生物型半髋关节置换术治疗老年移位股骨颈骨折的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析行半髋关节置换术治疗并获得随访的老年股骨颈骨折患者131例,其中骨水泥型半髋关节置换术63例,生物型半髋关节置换术68例,对两组患者的手术时间、出血量、术后引流量、术后卧床时间、并发症和术后 Harris 评分进行比较。结果两组患者均顺利完成手术,生物型半髋关节置换组手术时间少于骨水泥型组( P ﹤0.05),骨水泥型组患者术中出血量、术后引流量、术后卧床时间均少于生物型关节置换组( P ﹤0.05);骨水泥型组和生物型组患者不良反应发生率分别为12.7%和10.3%,术后1年 Harris 评分优良率分别为89.8%和91.3%,组间比较差异均无统计学意义( P ﹥0.05)。结论对于老年移位股骨颈骨折患者,行骨水泥型和生物型半髋关节置换术后关节功能状况和不良反应发生率无明显统计学差异,均能获得良好的效果。
目的:比較骨水泥型和生物型半髖關節置換術治療老年移位股骨頸骨摺的臨床療效。方法迴顧性分析行半髖關節置換術治療併穫得隨訪的老年股骨頸骨摺患者131例,其中骨水泥型半髖關節置換術63例,生物型半髖關節置換術68例,對兩組患者的手術時間、齣血量、術後引流量、術後臥床時間、併髮癥和術後 Harris 評分進行比較。結果兩組患者均順利完成手術,生物型半髖關節置換組手術時間少于骨水泥型組( P ﹤0.05),骨水泥型組患者術中齣血量、術後引流量、術後臥床時間均少于生物型關節置換組( P ﹤0.05);骨水泥型組和生物型組患者不良反應髮生率分彆為12.7%和10.3%,術後1年 Harris 評分優良率分彆為89.8%和91.3%,組間比較差異均無統計學意義( P ﹥0.05)。結論對于老年移位股骨頸骨摺患者,行骨水泥型和生物型半髖關節置換術後關節功能狀況和不良反應髮生率無明顯統計學差異,均能穫得良好的效果。
목적:비교골수니형화생물형반관관절치환술치료노년이위고골경골절적림상료효。방법회고성분석행반관관절치환술치료병획득수방적노년고골경골절환자131례,기중골수니형반관관절치환술63례,생물형반관관절치환술68례,대량조환자적수술시간、출혈량、술후인류량、술후와상시간、병발증화술후 Harris 평분진행비교。결과량조환자균순리완성수술,생물형반관관절치환조수술시간소우골수니형조( P ﹤0.05),골수니형조환자술중출혈량、술후인류량、술후와상시간균소우생물형관절치환조( P ﹤0.05);골수니형조화생물형조환자불량반응발생솔분별위12.7%화10.3%,술후1년 Harris 평분우량솔분별위89.8%화91.3%,조간비교차이균무통계학의의( P ﹥0.05)。결론대우노년이위고골경골절환자,행골수니형화생물형반관관절치환술후관절공능상황화불량반응발생솔무명현통계학차이,균능획득량호적효과。
Objective To evaluate curative effect of cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures in elderly patients. Methods Data of 131 femoral neck fracture elderly patients admitted into our hospital and performed hemiarthroplasty from Jun. 2010 to Dec. 2012 were retrospectively analyzed. Among the 131 patients,a total of 63 patients(69 hips)were performed with cemented hemiar-throplasty. For comparison,68 patients(68 hips)were performed uncemented hemiarthroplasty. The comparative items included operation time, blood loss,postoperative drainage,ambulatory time,complication incidence,the Harris hip score after the operation. Results The operations were successful in all patients. The uncemented hemiarthroplasty group was found to have a significantly advantages of operation time( P ﹤ 0. 05), and the cemented hemiarthroplasty group was found to have a significantly advantages of blood loss,postoperative drainage,ambulatory time( P ﹤0. 05). Incidence of adverse reactions were 4. 7% and 5. 6% respectively( P ﹥ 0. 05). Good rate of the Harris score were 89. 8% and 91. 3%respectively postoperative 1 year( P ﹥ 0. 05). Conclusion Both cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty have good clinic effects for dis-placed femoral neck fractures in elderly patients.