小切口髋关节置换的疗效分析  

Clinical Analysis of Minimal Incision for Total Hip Arthroplasty

作　　者：赵强[1] 陈兴爱 胡定祥[1] 唐影超 

机构地区：[1]四川省达州市第二人民医院骨科,四川达州635000

出　　处：《华西医学》2009年第7期1684-1686,共3页West China Medical Journal

摘　　要：目的:探讨小切口全髋关节置换的疗效及优缺点。方法:针对性选取我院行THA的病员48例,分为初期小切口THA组、熟练小切口THA组、传统切口THA组,各组16例。记录切口长度、术中出血量、术后12小时引流量、手术时间及Harris评分,对其治疗效果进行回顾性分析。结果:初期小切口THA组平均出血量,术后12小时平均引流量,平均手术时间等指标均高于传统组,术后Harris评分低于传统组,熟练组与传统组比较,切口长度较短、术中出血量略少,术后早期Harris评分高,远期Harris评分接近。结论:熟练小切口THA与传统切口THA比较远期疗效无明显优点,初期小切口THA不具微创优势,不必强求小切口THA,并应注重学习曲线。Objective： To study the clinical efficacy and advantages together with disadvantages of the minimal incision operation method for total hip arthroplasty. Methods： We selected 48 cases from our hospital, these cases were divided into 3 groups of 16 eases each： beginning period group of minimal incision THA, skilled group and traditional group. We recorded the incision length, peri-operative bleeding amount, drainage amount 12 hours after operation, operation time and Harris Hip score, also made analysis retrospectively on the treatment effect. Results： The records mentioned above （except Harris Hip score） in beginning period group were higher than traditional group, only Harris Hip score were lower. Compared with traditional group, skilled group had advantages： short incision length, less bleeding amount, higher Harris Hip score close to further score. Conclusion： Compared with traditional group, skilled group had no distinct advantages in further treatment effect. Beginning period group had no advantages in minimally invasive operation so that minimal incision THA should be avoided. Doctors should be keen on the learning curve on minimal invasive surgery for hip arthoplasty.

关 键 词：全髋关节置换 小切口 治疗结果 微创 

分 类 号：R687.4[医药卫生—骨科学]