三种手术内固定方法治疗胫腓骨骨折的疗效比较研究  

Three kinds of internal fixation methods in treatment of tibia and fibula fractures

作　　者：黄安宇 贺振年 

机构地区：[1]宁波市北仑区中医院骨科住院部,浙江宁波315800 [2]宁波市北仑区人民医院骨科,浙江宁波315800

出　　处：《中国现代医生》2014年第23期22-24,共3页China Modern Doctor

基　　金：浙江省基层卫生适宜技术转化应用计划(2012ZHB002)

摘　　要：目的探讨不同内固定方法治疗胫腓骨骨折的疗效。方法选取在我院住院治疗的胫腓骨骨折患者60例作为研究对象,根据内固定方法不同分为三组:外固定支架固定10例设立为A组;加压钢板固定20例设立为B组;交锁髓内钉固定30例设立为C组,比较三组患者术后的优良率、并发症及术后负重时间及骨折愈合时间。结果C组的优良率达93.3%,明显优于A、B组(P<0.05)。C组并发症发生率仅6.7%,明显低于A、B组(P<0.05)。C组行交锁髓内钉内固定治疗患者术后负重时间(29.1±2.7)d,明显短于A、B组(P<0.01)。C组术后骨折愈合时间(3.5±0.1)个月,明显短于A组(P<0.05),但C组术后骨折愈合时间与B组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论交锁髓内钉内固定治疗胫腓骨骨折的疗效明显优于其他两种内固定方法,并发症少,骨折愈合快,值得推广和应用。Objective To investigate the effect of different fixation methods in treatment of tibia and fibula fractures. Methods A total of 83 patients with fractures of the tibia and fibula as research subjects, according to the different fixation methods into three groups, external fixation in 10 cases ,the establishment of group A; compression plate 20 cases, the establishment of group B ; Intramedullary nailing 30 cases, the establishment of the C group. Results Group C＇s excellent rate of 93.3%, was significantly better than group A,B （P〈0.05）. The complication rate of group C was 6.7%, significantly lower than group A, B （P〈0.05）.Group C＇s interlocking intramedullary nail fixation of postoperative weight-bearing time （29.1±2.7） d, significantly shorter than group A, B （P〈0.01）. Group C＇s fracture healing time was （3.5±0.1） months, significantly shorter than group A（P〈0.05）, but compared with group B ,the difference was not statistically significant（P〉0.05）. Conclusion Intramedullary nail fixation of tibia and fibula fracture fixation is significantly better than the other two methods, fewer complications ,faster healing ,should be popularized and applied.

关 键 词：胫腓骨骨折 外固定支架 加压钢板 交锁髓内钉 并发症 

分 类 号：R687.3[医药卫生—骨科学]