阻挡螺钉配合逆行髓内钉内固定治疗股骨远端骨折的临床研究
|
摘要
目的探讨阻挡螺钉技术配合闭合复位逆行髓内钉内固定治疗股骨远端骨折的效果。方法选取2010年3月～2015年12月在我院创伤骨科收治的例股骨远端骨折患者42例作为研究对象,以随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组,各21例。对照组予以股骨远端锁定钢板内固定术治疗,观察组予以阻挡螺钉技术配合闭合复位逆行髓内钉内固定治疗,对比骨折愈合时间、膝关节功能恢复优良率、并发症发生率情况。结果观察组膝关节功能恢复优良率(95.24%)高于对照组(71.43%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);观察组骨折愈合时间短于对照组,并发症发生率(0)低于对照组(19.05%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论阻挡螺钉技术配合闭合复位逆行髓内钉内固定治疗股骨远端骨折,骨折愈合良好,临床推广价值高。
Objective To investigate the effect of blocking screw technique combined with closed reduction retrograde intramedullary nail internal fixation in the treatment of distal femoral fractures. Methods A total of 42 patients with distal femoral fractures admitted to our hospital from March 2010 to December 2015 were enrolled in the study. They were randomly divided into observation group and control group, with 21 cases in each group. The control group was treated with distal femoral locking plate internal fixation. The observation group was treated with the technique of blocking screw and closed reduction retrograde intramedullary nail internal fixation. The fracture healing time, the excellent rate of knee function recovery and the incidence of complications were compared. Results The excellent rate of knee function recovery in the observation group(95.24%) was higher than that in the control group(71.43%), and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). The fracture healing time of the observation group was shorter than that of the control group, and the complication rate was 0 in the observation group, lower than the 19.05% in the control group. The differences were statistically significant(P<0.05). Conclusion The technique of blocking screw combined with closed reduction retrograde intramedullary nail internal fixation for the treatment of distal femoral fractures can result in good fracture healing and has high clinical value.
Objective To investigate the effect of blocking screw technique combined with closed reduction retrograde intramedullary nail internal fixation in the treatment of distal femoral fractures. Methods A total of 42 patients with distal femoral fractures admitted to our hospital from March 2010 to December 2015 were enrolled in the study. They were randomly divided into observation group and control group, with 21 cases in each group. The control group was treated with distal femoral locking plate internal fixation. The observation group was treated with the technique of blocking screw and closed reduction retrograde intramedullary nail internal fixation. The fracture healing time, the excellent rate of knee function recovery and the incidence of complications were compared. Results The excellent rate of knee function recovery in the observation group(95.24%) was higher than that in the control group(71.43%), and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). The fracture healing time of the observation group was shorter than that of the control group, and the complication rate was 0 in the observation group, lower than the 19.05% in the control group. The differences were statistically significant(P<0.05). Conclusion The technique of blocking screw combined with closed reduction retrograde intramedullary nail internal fixation for the treatment of distal femoral fractures can result in good fracture healing and has high clinical value.
引文
[1]胡俊江,孙海飚,刘中国,等.交锁髓内钉与微创内固定系统板治疗老年股骨远端骨折的疗效分析[J].中国药物与临床,2016,16(3):373-374.
[2]邓秋奎,王仁才,鲍瑞林,等.LISS钢板与逆行交锁髓内钉治疗股骨远端骨折对膝关节功能影响的比较分析[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2014,29(1):60-61.
[3]张慧东,王井伟,白净.逆行交锁髓内钉与微创内固定钢板修复股骨远端骨折的生物力学性能比较[J].中国组织工程研究,2016,20(44):6577-6582.
[4]付世杰,孙勃,高云峰,等.逆行髓内钉与锁定钢板内固定治疗A、B型股骨远端骨折的疗效比较[J].河北医药,2015,37(22):3474-3475.
[5]吴昊,刘广辉,张铁,等.逆行髓内钉治疗股骨远端骨折[J].实用骨科杂志,2014,20(1):75-76.
[6]张锐,刘世清,周炎,等.逆行髓内钉、锁定加压钢板内固定治疗股骨远端骨折疗效比较的Meta分析[J].山东医药,2015,55(38):46-49.
[7]黄利斌,尹宗生.逆行髓内钉与锁定钢板治疗股骨远端骨折的疗效比较分析[J].中国矫形外科杂志,2015,23(8):678-682.
[8]王河忠,刘洋,王彩明,等.逆行髓内钉固定治疗股骨远端T形骨折[J].临床骨科杂志,2014,17(1):75-76.
[9]汤继磊,沈向阳,高为人,等.逆行交锁髓内钉和微创内固定系统治疗A型股骨远端骨折疗效比较[J].江苏医药,2016,42(14):1615-1617.
[10]杨冬松,王亮,甄相周,等.经髌骨下小切口逆行髓内钉内固定加植骨治疗股骨远端骨折不愈合的疗效观察[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2016,31(10):1086-1087.
[11]张威.股骨远端A及C型骨折给予锁定加压钢板对比逆行髓内钉的临床研究[J].中外医疗,2016,35(10):82-84.
[12]兰伟斌,涂学招,邱汉民,等.逆行交锁髓内钉与股骨远端锁定钢板内固定治疗老年股骨髁上骨折的疗效比较[J].中国现代医生,2016,54(18):73-75.
[13]肖俊枫.髓内钉与锁定钢板治疗股骨远端骨折的临床对比分析[J].当代医学,2014,20(4):73-74.
[14]杨灿水.逆行交锁髓内钉与动力髁螺钉治疗股骨远端骨折对比分析[J].中国伤残医学,2017,25(5):19-21.
[15]王庆,罗建宁,里欣波.阻挡螺钉技术在胫骨交锁髓内钉治疗胫骨近端骨折中的应用[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2014,29(1):76-77.
[2]邓秋奎,王仁才,鲍瑞林,等.LISS钢板与逆行交锁髓内钉治疗股骨远端骨折对膝关节功能影响的比较分析[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2014,29(1):60-61.
[3]张慧东,王井伟,白净.逆行交锁髓内钉与微创内固定钢板修复股骨远端骨折的生物力学性能比较[J].中国组织工程研究,2016,20(44):6577-6582.
[4]付世杰,孙勃,高云峰,等.逆行髓内钉与锁定钢板内固定治疗A、B型股骨远端骨折的疗效比较[J].河北医药,2015,37(22):3474-3475.
[5]吴昊,刘广辉,张铁,等.逆行髓内钉治疗股骨远端骨折[J].实用骨科杂志,2014,20(1):75-76.
[6]张锐,刘世清,周炎,等.逆行髓内钉、锁定加压钢板内固定治疗股骨远端骨折疗效比较的Meta分析[J].山东医药,2015,55(38):46-49.
[7]黄利斌,尹宗生.逆行髓内钉与锁定钢板治疗股骨远端骨折的疗效比较分析[J].中国矫形外科杂志,2015,23(8):678-682.
[8]王河忠,刘洋,王彩明,等.逆行髓内钉固定治疗股骨远端T形骨折[J].临床骨科杂志,2014,17(1):75-76.
[9]汤继磊,沈向阳,高为人,等.逆行交锁髓内钉和微创内固定系统治疗A型股骨远端骨折疗效比较[J].江苏医药,2016,42(14):1615-1617.
[10]杨冬松,王亮,甄相周,等.经髌骨下小切口逆行髓内钉内固定加植骨治疗股骨远端骨折不愈合的疗效观察[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2016,31(10):1086-1087.
[11]张威.股骨远端A及C型骨折给予锁定加压钢板对比逆行髓内钉的临床研究[J].中外医疗,2016,35(10):82-84.
[12]兰伟斌,涂学招,邱汉民,等.逆行交锁髓内钉与股骨远端锁定钢板内固定治疗老年股骨髁上骨折的疗效比较[J].中国现代医生,2016,54(18):73-75.
[13]肖俊枫.髓内钉与锁定钢板治疗股骨远端骨折的临床对比分析[J].当代医学,2014,20(4):73-74.
[14]杨灿水.逆行交锁髓内钉与动力髁螺钉治疗股骨远端骨折对比分析[J].中国伤残医学,2017,25(5):19-21.
[15]王庆,罗建宁,里欣波.阻挡螺钉技术在胫骨交锁髓内钉治疗胫骨近端骨折中的应用[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2014,29(1):76-77.