髋臼周围截骨三种手术入路比较  

Comparison of Three Different Approaches in Periacetabular Osteot omy

作　　者：罗殿中[1] 张洪[1] 张伟佳[1] 

机构地区：[1]解放军总医院第一附属医院骨一科,北京100048

出　　处：《实用骨科杂志》2013年第6期481-484,共4页Journal of Practical Orthopaedics

摘　　要：目的比较髂腹股沟入路、改良髂股入路、髂股双切口入路进行髋臼周围截骨手术的优缺点。方法自2010年2月至2011年7月对95例101髋分别采用上述三种不同手术入路进行髋臼周围截骨内固定术,通过回顾性研究,在年龄、性别、病变程度相似的情况下,比较不同手术入路髋臼周围截骨手术的手术时间、术中出血量、异体输血量、手术相关早期并发症等的差异。结果髂腹股沟入路手术时间较短、术中出血量较多(P<0.05);髂股双切口虽然术中出血量较少(P<0.05),但相关并发症较多;改良髂股入路虽手术时间稍延长,但术中出血少(P<0.05)、相关并发症较少。结论采用改良髂股入路进行髋臼周围截骨手术有较明显的优势。Objective To compare 3 different approaches to accomplish Bernese Periacetabular Osteotomy（BPO）. Methods From February 2010 to July 2011,95 cases with 101 hips underwent Bernese Periacetabular Osteotomy through Ilioinguinal approach（I--I）,Two incision Smith-Peterson approach（TSP）,Modified Smith-Peterson approach （MSP）. Data of age,gender ratio,and severity of DDH matched. The operation time,blood loss during operation, blood volume transfusion and early complications were compared retrospectively. Results It takes less operation time, more blood loss with Ilioinguinal approach （P〈0.05）. Less blood loss with Two incision Smith-Peterson （P〈0.05）,but more complications. Less blood loss（P〈0.05）,and less complications with Modified Smith-Peterson approach. Con- clusion The Modified Smith-Peterson approach is superior than the other 2 approaches doing BPO.

关 键 词：髋臼周围截骨术 手术入路 并发症 

分 类 号：R682.4[医药卫生—骨科学]