Y钢板与双张力带固定治疗肱骨髁间骨折对比研究  

Y-type plate vs double tension band in treatment of humeral intercondylar fracture

作　　者：程德根 张霖 黎浩晖 谭毅贤 

机构地区：[1]广东省肇庆市端州区人民医院骨科,肇庆526040

出　　处：《骨科》2011年第2期67-69,共3页ORTHOPAEDICS

摘　　要：目的比较Y钢板与双克氏针钢丝张力带固定肱骨髁间骨折的临床疗效。方法采用两种不同入路及固定治疗肱骨髁间骨折34例,其中经肱三头肌舌形瓣入路8例,经尺骨鹰嘴入路26例;Y钢板固定13例,双克氏针钢丝张力带固定21例。对手术入路、术后肘关节功能、并发症进行分析。结果本组随访时间6-26个月,平均13个月。肘关节功能按Ait-ken和Rorabeck标准进行功能评定：优良率Y钢板77%,双张力带法76%。结论两种方法均能取得良好的疗效,双克氏针钢丝张力带适用范围更广、更经济。良好的复位与固定,早期的康复训练是关节功能恢复的关键。Objective To compare the curative effects of the Y-type plate vs double tension band in the treatment of humeral intercondylar fracture.Methods Thirty-four cases of humeral intercondylar fractures were treated with different approaches and internal fixation： including 8 cases on approach to triceps tongue-shaped flap,and 26 cases to olecranon process of ulna.Surgical approaches,postoperative elbow function and complications were studied.Results The follow-up period was 6 to 26 months with an average of 13 months.According to Aitken and Rorabeck system,excellent and good rate was 77% in Y-type plate vs 76% in double tension band.Conclusion Both methods can achieve a good effect.Double tension band was used widely and economically.Good diaplasis and fixation,and functional exercise were the key factors.

关 键 词：肱骨骨折 外科手术 治疗 

分 类 号：R687.3[医药卫生—骨科学]