两种内固定方法治疗锁骨骨折的疗效比较  

Effective Comparision between Two Internal Fixation Methods in Treatment of Clavicular Fracture

作　　者：洪迪[1] 杜衡胜[1] 刘军[1] 

机构地区：[1]广东省中山市博爱医院骨科,广东中山528403

出　　处：《河北医学》2008年第3期298-300,共3页Hebei Medicine

摘　　要：目的:比较两种内固定方法治疗锁骨骨折的疗效。方法:回顾性分析2004年6月至2007年6月两种不同方法治疗的锁骨骨折患者68例,其中锁骨钩钢板组(A组)36例,克氏针张力带组(B组)32例。结果:A组优良率94.44%,B组优良率71.88%,两组比较差异具有统计学意义(P<0.001);并发症总发生率A组(5.56%)与B组(21.88%)比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:两种方法治疗锁骨骨折各具有优缺点,其中锁骨钩钢板内固定以其独特的治疗优点值得推荐应用。Objective： To compare the curative effects of two internal fixations in the treatment of clavicular fracture. Method： From June 2006 to June 2007, 68 cases with clavicular fracture were treated with two methods, including 36 cases （ group A ） with clavicular hook pate and 32 cases （ group B ） with kirschiner wire plus tenson. Result： The good and excellent rate was 94.44% in group A and 71.88% in group B, there was significant difference in two groups （ P 〈 0. 001 ）. The complications of group A （ 5.56% ） was much lower than that of group B （ 21.88% ） , and the difference was significant in two groups （ P 〈 0.05 ）. Conclusion： There were different advantages and disadvantages in two methods. And for the especial advan- tages of clavicular hook pate, it is worth recommending to be used widely.

关 键 词：锁骨骨折 锁骨钩钢板 克氏针张力带 内固定 

分 类 号：R687[医药卫生—骨科学]