S形锁骨接骨板、形状记忆合金环抱器或重建钢板治疗锁骨骨折209例疗效分析  

Efficacy analysis of 209 cases of clavicle fracture by treatment with"s"shape clavicle fixator,shape memory alloy embracing fixator or resetting steel-plate

作　　者：张琛[1] 柴绍强[1] 付树安[1] 

机构地区：[1]玉溪市人民医院,云南玉溪653100

出　　处：《云南医药》2012年第1期17-20,共4页Medicine and Pharmacy of Yunnan

摘　　要：目的比较S形锁骨接骨板、形状记忆合金环抱器、与重建钢板治疗锁骨中1/3骨折的临床疗效。方法自2000年7月～2011年8月我科用S形锁骨接骨板、镍钛形状记忆合金环抱器和重建钢板治疗锁骨中1/3骨折共209例,根据临床具体情况随机分为3组并对手术时间、骨折愈合时间及评定疗效临床结果进行对比分析。结果 S形接骨板组与形状记忆合金环抱器组内固定手术时间差异无统计学意义,但二者与重建钢板组手术时间相比较差异有统计学意义。骨折愈合后取出内固定物手术时间重建钢板组与S形接骨板组差异无统计学意义,但重建钢板组和S形接骨板组与形状记忆合金组相比较差异有统计学意义。3组患者骨折愈合时间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 S形锁骨接骨板是目前治疗锁骨中1/3骨折的较好方法。Objective To compare the clinical effects of the S-shaped clavicle plate, shape memory alloy embracing, and reconstruction plate in treatment of clavicle midpiece fracture. Methods 209 patients with clavicle mid- piece fracture were treated with the S-shaped clavicle plate, shape memory alloy embracing, or reconstruction plate from July 2000 to August 2011. According to the treatment method ,patients were divided into 3 groups.The operative time, fracture union time and efficacy assessment were used to comparative analysis of clinical outcomes. Results The fixation time between S-shaped plate group and the shape memory alloy embracing group had no significant dif- ference, but both them compared with reconstruction plate group , the time differences had statistical significance. The time from fracture healing to implant reconstruction surgery between reconstruction plate group and the S-shaped plate group had no significant difference, but the times of the reconstruction group and the S-shaped steel plate group compared with shape memory alloy group, had statistical significance. The fracture healing times between the three groups had no significant difference. Conclusion The S-shaped plate is the better way in the treatment of 1 / 3 clavicle fracture.

关 键 词：锁骨骨折 内固定 

分 类 号：R683[医药卫生—骨科学]