PFNA与LCP治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折的疗效比较分析  

Comparison between locking compression plate and proximal femoral nail antirotation for elderly intertrochanteric fractures

作　　者：陈祥[1] 林国兵[1] 王怀云[1] 李秋举[1] 李远东[1] 

机构地区：[1]南京军区福州总医院附属第一医院95临床部,福建福州351100

出　　处：《临床军医杂志》2014年第12期1252-1254,1310,共4页Clinical Journal of Medical Officers

摘　　要：目的比较应用锁定加压钢板（LCP）与股骨近端加锁髓内钉（PFNA）两种内固定方式治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效。方法根据老年股骨粗隆间不同的骨折分型，对72例老年股骨粗隆间骨折患者分别采用LCP（LCP组，n=34）及PFNA（PFNA组，n=38）进行内固定。对两组围术期各项指标和术后髋关节功能恢复情况进行比较。结果两组患者均获随访7～24个月。两组骨折手术时间、术后髋关节功能比较，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。两组切口大小、出血量、卧床时间、平均骨性愈合时间比较，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论两种内固定方法临床疗效基本相当，但与LCP比较，PFNA适用于几乎所有的骨折类型且创伤小、出血量少、平均愈合及卧床时间更短，但对于某些特殊类型的骨折LCP固定也有其优势。Objective To compare the clinical effects of locking compression plate （LCP） and proximal femoral nail antirotation （PFNA） in the treatment of intertrochanterie fractures. Methods A total of 72 elderly patients with intertrochanteric fractures were treated with LCP （ LCP group, n = 34 ） and PFNA （ PFNA group, n = 38）. Perioperative indicators and degree of functional recov- ery of hip after surgeiT were compared between the two groups, Results All the patients were followed up for 7 - 24 months. Throughout the comparison between the two groups, the differences in incision size, bleeding volume, stay-in-bed time and average healing time were statistically significant （ P 〈 O. 05 ） , and that in fracture operation time and postoperative hip function were of no significant difference （P 〉 0.05）. Conclusion Both the two internal fixation methods （LCP and PFNA） are clinically effective, but compared with LCP, PFNA is more suitable for ahnost all types of fractures with less trauma, less bleeding and shorter healing and stay-in-bed time. Though, LCP has its own strength in some particular types of bone fracture.

关 键 词：股骨粗隆间骨折 股骨近端加锁髓内钉 锁定加压钢板 老年人 

分 类 号：R683.42[医药卫生—骨科学]