中国社区医师
中國社區醫師
중국사구의사
Chinese Community Doctors
2014年
18期
53-54
,共2页
胫骨骨折%止血带%髓内钉
脛骨骨摺%止血帶%髓內釘
경골골절%지혈대%수내정
Tibial fracture%Tourniquet%Intramedullary nail
目的：评价应用止血带对髓内钉治疗胫骨干骨折的影响。方法：2008-2012年收治胫骨干骨折患者98例，应用止血带的50例患者为试验组，未使用止血带的48例为对照组。评价两组手术持续时间、术后患肢疼痛 VAS 评分(Visual Analogue Scale)、感染、愈合时间和骨折不愈合率。结果：①平均手术时间：试验组(53.93±9.02)分钟；对照组(54.22±10.96)分钟，两组比较差异无统计学意义(P=0.060)；②VAS 评分：试验组(2.82±1.36)分；对照组(1.88±1.19)分，两组比较差异有统计学意义(P=0.004)；③平均愈合时间：试验组(4.55±1.72)个月，对照组(4.69±1.66)个月，两组比较差异无统计学意义(P=0.237)；试验组和对照组各有2例切口感染；试验组和对照组各有3例骨折不愈合。结论：对于闭合性或Gustilo-Anderson Ⅰ度胫骨干骨折采用闭合复位髓内钉内固定可不采用止血带。
目的：評價應用止血帶對髓內釘治療脛骨榦骨摺的影響。方法：2008-2012年收治脛骨榦骨摺患者98例，應用止血帶的50例患者為試驗組，未使用止血帶的48例為對照組。評價兩組手術持續時間、術後患肢疼痛 VAS 評分(Visual Analogue Scale)、感染、愈閤時間和骨摺不愈閤率。結果：①平均手術時間：試驗組(53.93±9.02)分鐘；對照組(54.22±10.96)分鐘，兩組比較差異無統計學意義(P=0.060)；②VAS 評分：試驗組(2.82±1.36)分；對照組(1.88±1.19)分，兩組比較差異有統計學意義(P=0.004)；③平均愈閤時間：試驗組(4.55±1.72)箇月，對照組(4.69±1.66)箇月，兩組比較差異無統計學意義(P=0.237)；試驗組和對照組各有2例切口感染；試驗組和對照組各有3例骨摺不愈閤。結論：對于閉閤性或Gustilo-Anderson Ⅰ度脛骨榦骨摺採用閉閤複位髓內釘內固定可不採用止血帶。
목적：평개응용지혈대대수내정치료경골간골절적영향。방법：2008-2012년수치경골간골절환자98례，응용지혈대적50례환자위시험조，미사용지혈대적48례위대조조。평개량조수술지속시간、술후환지동통 VAS 평분(Visual Analogue Scale)、감염、유합시간화골절불유합솔。결과：①평균수술시간：시험조(53.93±9.02)분종；대조조(54.22±10.96)분종，량조비교차이무통계학의의(P=0.060)；②VAS 평분：시험조(2.82±1.36)분；대조조(1.88±1.19)분，량조비교차이유통계학의의(P=0.004)；③평균유합시간：시험조(4.55±1.72)개월，대조조(4.69±1.66)개월，량조비교차이무통계학의의(P=0.237)；시험조화대조조각유2례절구감염；시험조화대조조각유3례골절불유합。결론：대우폐합성혹Gustilo-Anderson Ⅰ도경골간골절채용폐합복위수내정내고정가불채용지혈대。
Objective:To evaluate the effect of using tourniquet on intramedullary nail in the treatment of tibial shaft fracture. Methods:98 cases with tibial shaft fracture were selected from 2008 to 2012.50 cases were used tourniquet as the experimental group.48 cases weren't used tourniquet as the control group.Compare the indexes of the two groups,including the operation duration,postoperative limb pain VAS score(Visual Analogue Scale),infection,healing time and the nonunion rate.Results:The average operation time of the experimental group was(53.93±9.02) minutes,and that of the control group was(54.22±10.96) minutes.There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups(P=0.060).The VAS score of the experimental group was(2.82±1.36),and that of the control group was(1.88±1.19).There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups(P=0.004).The average healing time of the experimental group was(4.55±1.72) months,and that of the control group was(4.69±1.66) months.There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups(P=0.237).The experimental group and the control group each had 2 cases of incision infection.The experimental group and the control group each had 3 cases of nonunion.Conclusion:The closed or Gustilo-Anderson Ⅰ degree of tibial shaft fracture was treated with closed reduction and internal fixation with intramedullary nail without tourniquet.
