CAJ | 학술논문

目的：比较Herbert螺钉与克氏针治疗MasonⅡ、Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折的疗效。方法手术治疗29例MasonⅡ、Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折患者，采用切开复位克氏针固定治疗13例，采用切开复位Herbert螺钉内固定治疗16例。参照Broberg-Morrey 肘关节功能评分标准评定，比较两组患者术后临床疗效。结果患者均获随访，时间12~24(15．3±1．7)个月。术后肘关节功能评分、肘关节活动范围、提携角及桡骨近端移位Herbert螺钉组均优于克氏针组，差异有统计学意义(P<0．05)。结论 Herbert螺钉内固定治疗桡骨头骨折疗效明显优于克氏针内固定。
목적：비교Herbert라정여극씨침치료MasonⅡ、Ⅲ형뇨골두골절적료효。방법수술치료29례MasonⅡ、Ⅲ형뇨골두골절환자，채용절개복위극씨침고정치료13례，채용절개복위Herbert라정내고정치료16례。삼조Broberg-Morrey 주관절공능평분표준평정，비교량조환자술후림상료효。결과환자균획수방，시간12~24(15．3±1．7)개월。술후주관절공능평분、주관절활동범위、제휴각급뇨골근단이위Herbert라정조균우우극씨침조，차이유통계학의의(P<0．05)。결론 Herbert라정내고정치료뇨골두골절료효명현우우극씨침내고정。
Objective To compare the treatment efficacy of Herbert screw and Kirschner wires on Mason type typeⅡ,Ⅲ radial head fractures. Methods 29 cases of Mason typeⅡ,Ⅲradial head fracture patients were treated with two methods,13 cases of radial head fractures were treated with Kirschner wires, and other 16 cases were treated with Herbert screws. The excellent and good rates according to the Broberg-Morrey elbow score standard were compared. Results All the patients were followed up for 12~24(15. 3 ± 1. 7)months. According to elbow score,elbow range of motion,carrying angle and shift of radius,the effect of Herbert screws group was better than that of Kirschner wires group, the difference was significance(P<0. 05). Conclusions Fractures of radial head can be well treated with open reduction and internal fixation by Herbert screws,which offer better results than Kirschner wires.