两种内固定技术治疗下颌骨骨折的对比研究  

Two Internal Fixation Comparative Study of Treatment of Mandibular Fractures

作　　者：秦涛[1] 缪爱林[1] 朱小龙[1] 

机构地区：[1]常州市第四人民医院头颈外科,江苏常州213001

出　　处：《中国伤残医学》2007年第5期21-23,共3页Chinese Journal of Trauma and Disability Medicine

摘　　要：目的:观察下颌骨骨折治疗中加压内固定和非加压内固定的疗效差异,对两种固定形式的临床应用作出评价。方法:下颌骨骨折57例分成两组,分别采用加压内固定和非加压内固定进行治疗,对比研究两组病例术后愈合情况,功能恢复,X片检查结果等差异。结果:两组病例术后骨折愈合情况良好;共有7例术后有咬合干扰,调磨后恢复正常;2例术后感染;术后8周X片显示加压内固定组骨折愈合改建基本完成,优于非加压内固定组。结论:加压内固定和非加压内固定都完全能达到AO关于内固定的要求,均是下颌骨骨折良好的固定方式,加压内固定技术要求高,但固定理想,骨折愈合更快,临床应用表明加压内固定的骨折愈合早期具有明显的优势。Objective： To observe mandibular fracture treatment pressurized and non-pressurized fixed within a fixed period of efficacy and two of the clinical evaluation of a fixed form. Methods： 57 patients with mandibular fractures were divided into two groups, namely non-pressurized and pressurized internal fixation for the treatment of internal fixation. Comparative study of two groups of patients after healing, recovery, X-ray findings and others. Results： The two groups of patients who fracture was healed well; There were seven cases postoperative occlusal interference, regulation and resume normal grinding and two cases of postoperative infection; Pressure within eight weeks after X-rays revealed healing fracture fixation into basically completed, was better than the non-pressurized internal fixation. Conclusion： The pressurized and non-pressurized fixed within a fixed period of AO were fully able to meet the requirements of internal fixation. Might be a good mandibular fracture fixation, internal fixation compression technology, but fixed ideals, fracture healing faster. Clinical application had shown pressure early fixation of fracture healing is an obvious advantage.

关 键 词：坚固内固定 下颌骨骨折 加压内固定 

分 类 号：R782.2[医药卫生—口腔医学]