尺骨鹰嘴骨折两种治疗方法的疗效比较  

Effect comparison of two kinds of therapeutic methods of olecranon fracture

作　　者：眭杰[1] 方文[1] 童立苗[1] 

机构地区：[1]解放军第102医院骨科,江苏常州213003

出　　处：《中国骨伤》2008年第1期60-61,共2页China Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology

摘　　要：目的:比较尺骨鹰嘴钢板和张力带治疗尺骨鹰嘴骨折的疗效。方法:采用2种方法治疗尺骨鹰嘴骨折63例,张力带内固定组(A组)35例,男21例,女14例;年龄15～62岁,平均48.9岁。尺骨鹰嘴钢板内固定组(B组)28例,男20例,女8例;年龄25～67岁,平均50.6岁。按Delee,JC(1984)分类方法,A组1A型5例,1B型8例,2型14例,3型7例,4型1例;B组1A型3例,1B型5例,2型6例,3型11例,4型3例。比较两组固定方法的疗效。结果:63例患者均获随访,时间6～15个月,参照庞桂根疗效评价标准[1],B组:优20例,良7例,可1例,差0例;A组:优23例,良10例,可2例,差0例。两种治疗方法疗效差异无统计学意义。结论:尺骨鹰嘴钢板和张力带都是治疗尺骨鹰嘴骨折的有效方法,可根据具体情况选择使用。Objective：To compare the effects of olecranon plate and tension band in the treatment of olecranon fracture. Methods：Sixty-three patients with olecranon fracture were treated with olecranon plate and tension band. Thirty-five patients（21 male and 14 female,aged from 15 to 62 years,with an average of 48.9 years）were involved in tension band group and 28 patients（20 male and 8 female,aged from 25 to 67 years,with an average of 50.6 years）were involved in plate group. According to the Delee,JC classification in 1984,there were type 1A in 5 cases,type 1B in 8 cases,type 2 in 17 cases, type 3 in 7 cases and type 4 in 1 case in tension band group;there were type 1A in 3 cases, type 1B in 5 cases, .type 2 in 6 cases,type 3 in 11 cases and type 4 in 3 cases in plate group. Results：Sixty-three cases were all followed up from 6 to 15 months. According to the criterion of PANG Gui-gen,the results were excellent in 20 cases,good in 7 cases,fair in 1 case and no bad in plate group;the results were excellent in 23 cases,good in 10 cases,fair in 21 case and no bad in tension band group. The therapeutic effect of two groups has no significantly statistic difference. Conclusion： Both olecranon plate and tension band are the effective treatments for olecranon fracture. The selection of two methods should depend on to the state of fracture.

关 键 词：尺骨鹰嘴骨折 内固定器 尺骨鹰嘴钢板 张力带 

分 类 号：R683.410.5[医药卫生—骨科学] R683.42[医药卫生—外科学]