两种方法治疗AllmanⅢ型肩锁关节脱位的疗效对比和生物力学分析  

Biomechanical analysis and effective comparison of two kinds of internal fixation in treatment of Allman Ⅲ type acromioclavicular joint dislocation

作　　者：张卫东[1,2] 赵万德 贾莉婷[1] 王鹏[1] 张展[1] 

机构地区：[1]郑州大学第三附属医院检验科,郑州450052 [2]河南省现代医学研究院中医院

出　　处：《医药论坛杂志》2012年第8期31-32,共2页Journal of Medical Forum

摘　　要：目的比较锁骨钩钛板与张力带钢丝治疗AllmanⅢ型肩锁关节脱位的临床疗效,并作生物力学分析。方法选择AllmanⅢ型肩锁关节脱位患者37例随机分为两组,其中A组19例使用锁骨钩钛板治疗,B组18例使用张力带钢丝治疗。比较两组术后并发症及治疗半年后肩关节功能情况。结果 A组与B组术后并发症比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);按照洛杉矶加利福尼亚大学肩关节等级评分系统(UCLA)评定治疗半年后肩关节功能,A组优11例,良7例,差1例,优良率为94.7%;B组优8例,良4例,差6例,优良率为66.7%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论锁骨钩钛板内固定可恢复肩锁关节的微动特性和解剖结构,治疗创伤小,并发症少,是治疗AllmanⅢ型肩锁关节脱位的良好术式。Objective To explore the biomechanical problem and effect of clavicular hook plate（CHP） and the tension band（TB） in treatment of Allman Ⅲ type acromioclavicular joint dislocation.Methods Totally 37 patients with Allman Ⅲ type acromioclavicular joint dislocation were divided into two groups including A and B,accidentally.19 patients as group A by used CHP treatment,18 patients as group B by used TB treatment,after 6 months,shoulder function and complications were compared.Results In the group A and group B,there were significant differences in complications（P0.05）.According to the standard of UCLA,in group A,excellent in 11 cases,good in 7 cases,bad in 1 case.In group B,excellent in 8 cases,good in 4 cases,bad in 6 cases.The fine rate of two groups were 94.7% and 66.7% respectively,Chi-square test show the difference statistically（P0.05）.Conclusions CHP can restore the joint fretting characteristics and anatomic structure,which has low trauma and few complications in treatment of Allman Ⅲ type acromioclavicular joint dislocation,it should be treated Allman Ⅲ type acromioclavicular joint dislocation as the good operating method.

关 键 词：锁骨钩钛板 张力带钢丝 AllmanⅢ型肩锁关节脱位 

分 类 号：R684.7[医药卫生—骨科学]