江西中医药大学学报
江西中醫藥大學學報
강서중의약대학학보
Journal of Jiangxi University of Traditional Chinese Medicine
2015年
5期
47-48,54
,共3页
儿童%肱骨髁上骨折%疗效评价
兒童%肱骨髁上骨摺%療效評價
인동%굉골과상골절%료효평개
Children%Humerus Condyle Fracture%Curative Effect Evaluation
目的:探讨两种不同手术入路对儿童肱骨髁上骨折术后恢复及疗效评价的影响。方法回顾萧山中医院2013年1月—2014年6月收治的肱骨髁上骨折患儿30例,均为伸直型,将其分为两组,A组(15例)采用肘外侧入路,B组(15例)采用肘内外侧联合手术入路进行治疗,记录显露时间、手术时间并采用2000年中华医学会手外科学会上肢部分功能评定标准评分。结果显露时间A组(61.21±3.10)min,B组(52.20±2.51)min,手术时间A组(20.35±3.70),B组(16.32±3.25),A组的显露时间、手术时间均大于B组(P<0.05)。功能评分A组(7~8分)7例,(5~6分)6例,(3~4分)2例,优良率86.67%,B组(7~8分)9例,(5~6分)5例,(3~4分)1例,优良率93.33%,功能评价A组低于B组( P<0.05)。结论采用肘外侧入路与肘内外侧联合入路相比,内外侧联合入路的术后恢复及疗效评价均明显优于肘外侧入路。
目的:探討兩種不同手術入路對兒童肱骨髁上骨摺術後恢複及療效評價的影響。方法迴顧蕭山中醫院2013年1月—2014年6月收治的肱骨髁上骨摺患兒30例,均為伸直型,將其分為兩組,A組(15例)採用肘外側入路,B組(15例)採用肘內外側聯閤手術入路進行治療,記錄顯露時間、手術時間併採用2000年中華醫學會手外科學會上肢部分功能評定標準評分。結果顯露時間A組(61.21±3.10)min,B組(52.20±2.51)min,手術時間A組(20.35±3.70),B組(16.32±3.25),A組的顯露時間、手術時間均大于B組(P<0.05)。功能評分A組(7~8分)7例,(5~6分)6例,(3~4分)2例,優良率86.67%,B組(7~8分)9例,(5~6分)5例,(3~4分)1例,優良率93.33%,功能評價A組低于B組( P<0.05)。結論採用肘外側入路與肘內外側聯閤入路相比,內外側聯閤入路的術後恢複及療效評價均明顯優于肘外側入路。
목적:탐토량충불동수술입로대인동굉골과상골절술후회복급료효평개적영향。방법회고소산중의원2013년1월—2014년6월수치적굉골과상골절환인30례,균위신직형,장기분위량조,A조(15례)채용주외측입로,B조(15례)채용주내외측연합수술입로진행치료,기록현로시간、수술시간병채용2000년중화의학회수외과학회상지부분공능평정표준평분。결과현로시간A조(61.21±3.10)min,B조(52.20±2.51)min,수술시간A조(20.35±3.70),B조(16.32±3.25),A조적현로시간、수술시간균대우B조(P<0.05)。공능평분A조(7~8분)7례,(5~6분)6례,(3~4분)2례,우량솔86.67%,B조(7~8분)9례,(5~6분)5례,(3~4분)1례,우량솔93.33%,공능평개A조저우B조( P<0.05)。결론채용주외측입로여주내외측연합입로상비,내외측연합입로적술후회복급료효평개균명현우우주외측입로。
Objective:To investigate two different surgical approaches for children on the humerus condyle fracture restore and curative effect evaluation of influence.Methods:Retrospective xiaoshan hospital in January of 2013–June of 2014 on the condyle of the hume-rus fractures were 30 cases of children, are straight type, it can be divided into two groups, group A (15 cases) with elbow lateral ap-proach, group B (n =15) using elbow inside and outside combined surgical approach to treatment, records show time, operation time and USES the luxury institute of Chinese medical association in 2000 upper part function evaluation standard score.Results Show time (61.2 ±3.10) min group A, group B (52.20 ±2.51) min, operation time (20.35 ±3.70) of group A, group B (16.32 ±3.25), show time, operation time of group A were greater than group B ( P<0.05) .Functional score in group A (7 ~8) 7 cases, 6 cases (5 ~6), (3 ~4), 2 cases was 86.67%, and group B (7 ~8) 9 cases, 5 cases (5 ~6), (3 ~4), 1 case was 93.33%, the function evaluation in group A than group B (P<0.05).Conclusion The elbow lateral approach compared with elbow inside and out-side into the road, inside and outside the postoperative recovery of joint, and the evaluation of the curative effect is better than the lat-eral approach.