解剖钢板治疗Pilon骨折的临床疗效探讨
|
摘要
目的探讨解剖钢板治疗Pilon骨折的临床疗效,以期为临床Pilon骨折提供更科学的治疗方法。方法选取该院2017年6月—2018年6月收治的102例Pilon骨折行解剖钢板治疗的患者作为该次研究主体,其中,Ruedi分型有,Ⅰ型22例,Ⅱ型41例,Ⅲ型39例。所有患者均按照术前准备、手术、术后治疗3个环节进行,观察总的手术治疗优良率与不同Ruedi分型患者的手术治疗优良率。结果 102例患者中,总的手术优良率为84.31%;不同Ruedi分型的骨折患者的手术优良率比较,Ⅰ型90.91%>Ⅱ型85.37%>Ⅲ型79.49%,但两两相比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);不同Ruedi分型的骨折患者的手术基本情况比较,Ⅰ型患者的手术时间与术中出血量小于Ⅱ型与Ⅲ型患者,但组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);Ⅱ型与Ⅲ型患者的手术时间与术中出血量相比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论解剖钢板对Pilon骨折患者具有较高的治疗价值,临床可根据患者的实际情况选择该种治疗方法。尤其对于Ruedi分型为Ⅰ型的患者,其治疗效果相对较好。
Objective To study the clinical curative effect of anatomic plate in treatment of Pilon fracture to provide more scientific treatment method of clinical Pilon fracture. Methods 102 cases of patients with Pilon fracture treated with anatomic plate admitted and treated in our hospital from June 2017 to June 2018 were selected as the research objects, and the Ruedi type included 22 cases in the type I, 41 cases in the type II, and 39 cases in the type II, and all patients were conducted through the preoperative preparation, intraoperative treatment and postoperative treatment, and the total treatment excellent and good rate in the observation and the operative treatment excellent and good rate of patients with different Ruedi type were observed. Results Of 102 cases of patients, the total excellent and good rate was84.31%, and the operative excellent and good rate of patients with different Ruedi types showed that the type I 90.91%> type II 85.37%> type III 79.49%, and the differences were not statistically significant(P>0.05), and the operative time and intraoperative bleeding amount of patients in type I was lower than that in type II and type III, and the differences between the two groups were not statistically significant(P>0.05), and the differences in the operative time and intraoperative bleeding amount between the patients in type II and patients in type II were not statistically significant(P>0.05). Conclusion The anatomic plate has a higher treatment value of patients with Pilon fracture, and we should select the treatment method according to the practical conditions, especially for the patients in type I according to the Ruedi type, and the treatment effect is relatively better.
Objective To study the clinical curative effect of anatomic plate in treatment of Pilon fracture to provide more scientific treatment method of clinical Pilon fracture. Methods 102 cases of patients with Pilon fracture treated with anatomic plate admitted and treated in our hospital from June 2017 to June 2018 were selected as the research objects, and the Ruedi type included 22 cases in the type I, 41 cases in the type II, and 39 cases in the type II, and all patients were conducted through the preoperative preparation, intraoperative treatment and postoperative treatment, and the total treatment excellent and good rate in the observation and the operative treatment excellent and good rate of patients with different Ruedi type were observed. Results Of 102 cases of patients, the total excellent and good rate was84.31%, and the operative excellent and good rate of patients with different Ruedi types showed that the type I 90.91%> type II 85.37%> type III 79.49%, and the differences were not statistically significant(P>0.05), and the operative time and intraoperative bleeding amount of patients in type I was lower than that in type II and type III, and the differences between the two groups were not statistically significant(P>0.05), and the differences in the operative time and intraoperative bleeding amount between the patients in type II and patients in type II were not statistically significant(P>0.05). Conclusion The anatomic plate has a higher treatment value of patients with Pilon fracture, and we should select the treatment method according to the practical conditions, especially for the patients in type I according to the Ruedi type, and the treatment effect is relatively better.
引文
[1]高彦军,张勇,郑杰,等.前侧pilon骨折的诊断和治疗[J].中华创伤杂志,2016,32(5):423-426.
[2]张鹏,张春艳.不同手术固定方式治疗AO-C3型Pilon骨折的临床对照研究[J].解放军医药杂志,2017,29(4):75-77.
[3]蒋亮东,陈先礼,汤敬武,等.胫骨远端外侧L形解剖锁定钢板治疗胫骨Pilon骨折[J].中国现代手术学杂志,2016(5):347-350.
[4]曹前来,周杰,杨海涛,等.延期锁定解剖钢板内固定治疗C型Pilon骨折[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2016(s1):58-59.
[5]苏郁,许庆山,郭卫中,等.胫骨远端后侧解剖型锁定钢板内固定治疗后Pilon骨折的疗效分析[J].中国矫形外科杂志,2017,25(18):1721-1723.
[6]王浩,李连华,彭城,等.不同内固定方式治疗胫骨后pilon骨折的疗效分析[J].中华创伤骨科杂志,2016,18(6):481-486.
[7]张鹤鹏,杨成林,耿硕.不同钢板内固定治疗RuediAllgowerⅡ、Ⅲ型闭合性胫骨Pilon骨折的临床疗效比较研究[J].医学研究杂志,2016,45(12):105-108.
[8]Hani El-Mowafi,Ahmed El-Hawary,Yasser Kandil.The management of tibial pilon fractures with the Ilizarov fixator:The role of ankle arthroscopy[J].The Foot,2015,25(4):238-243.
[9]庞遵平,那键,张晓东,等.微创切口插入技术结合内侧锁定解剖钢板治疗Ruedi-AllgowerⅡ型Pilon骨折的疗效分析[J].中国骨与关节杂志,2016,5(8):623-626.
[10]喻都,肖海军,薛锋,等.个体化手术入路治疗后侧Pilon骨折14例近期临床疗效评价[J].生物骨科材料与临床研究,2016,13(4):14-17.
[11]王登峰,刘栋,林凡国,等.胫骨远端解剖锁定钢板治疗复杂Pilon骨折临床疗效分析[J].中国中西医结合外科杂志,2016,22(2):171-173.
[2]张鹏,张春艳.不同手术固定方式治疗AO-C3型Pilon骨折的临床对照研究[J].解放军医药杂志,2017,29(4):75-77.
[3]蒋亮东,陈先礼,汤敬武,等.胫骨远端外侧L形解剖锁定钢板治疗胫骨Pilon骨折[J].中国现代手术学杂志,2016(5):347-350.
[4]曹前来,周杰,杨海涛,等.延期锁定解剖钢板内固定治疗C型Pilon骨折[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2016(s1):58-59.
[5]苏郁,许庆山,郭卫中,等.胫骨远端后侧解剖型锁定钢板内固定治疗后Pilon骨折的疗效分析[J].中国矫形外科杂志,2017,25(18):1721-1723.
[6]王浩,李连华,彭城,等.不同内固定方式治疗胫骨后pilon骨折的疗效分析[J].中华创伤骨科杂志,2016,18(6):481-486.
[7]张鹤鹏,杨成林,耿硕.不同钢板内固定治疗RuediAllgowerⅡ、Ⅲ型闭合性胫骨Pilon骨折的临床疗效比较研究[J].医学研究杂志,2016,45(12):105-108.
[8]Hani El-Mowafi,Ahmed El-Hawary,Yasser Kandil.The management of tibial pilon fractures with the Ilizarov fixator:The role of ankle arthroscopy[J].The Foot,2015,25(4):238-243.
[9]庞遵平,那键,张晓东,等.微创切口插入技术结合内侧锁定解剖钢板治疗Ruedi-AllgowerⅡ型Pilon骨折的疗效分析[J].中国骨与关节杂志,2016,5(8):623-626.
[10]喻都,肖海军,薛锋,等.个体化手术入路治疗后侧Pilon骨折14例近期临床疗效评价[J].生物骨科材料与临床研究,2016,13(4):14-17.
[11]王登峰,刘栋,林凡国,等.胫骨远端解剖锁定钢板治疗复杂Pilon骨折临床疗效分析[J].中国中西医结合外科杂志,2016,22(2):171-173.