加压锁定钢板与防旋髓内钉治疗高龄患者转子间骨折对比研究  

A comparative study between PF-LCP vs.PFNA fixation in the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture in senile patients

作　　者：李兴艳[1] 张津铭[1] 鲍远[1] 叶亚平[1] 李文凯[1] 印卫锋[1] 郭风劲[1] 陈安民[1] 

机构地区：[1]华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院骨科,武汉430030

出　　处：《骨科》2015年第2期75-78,共4页ORTHOPAEDICS

摘　　要：目的比较股骨近端加压锁定钢板（proximal femoral locking compress plate,PF-LCP）与股骨近端防旋髓内钉（proximal femoral nail anti-rotation,PFNA）治疗高龄患者转子间骨折的临床效果差异,为治疗高龄患者转子间骨折提供依据。方法统计比较两种手术方法的手术时间、术中出血量、术后并发症和术后髋关节功能。术后随访,时间3个月~5年,平均26个月。结果两种手术方法的手术时间、术中出血量比较,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;PF-LCP治疗高龄患者股骨转子间骨折术中摄片次数少,术后髋关节关节功能恢复更好（P〈0.05）。结论相对于PFNA内固定治疗,PF-LCP治疗高龄患者股骨转子间骨折髋关节功能恢复更好。Objective To compare the clinical effects of PFNA fixation with PF-LCP,providing clinical evidence in the treatment of senile intertrochanteric fractures.Methods By randomized-controlled trials,the clinical data including operative time,intraoperative blood loss,postoperative complications,and postoperative hip function were collected in both two treatments.All patients were followed up for3 months to 5 years,with the average of 26 months.Statistical methods were made to analyze and compare these data.Results There were significant differences in the operative time and blood loss between two groups（P 0.05）.In addition,the patients with treatment of PF-LCP got fewer intraoperative fluoroscopy times and better functional recovery of hip joint（P〈0.05）.ConclusionCompared with PFNA fixation,PF-LCP in senile patients with intertrochanteric fracture got better functional recovery of hip joint.

关 键 词：转子间骨折 老年人 股骨近端加压锁定钢板 股骨近端防旋髓内钉 治疗结果 

分 类 号：R687.3[医药卫生—骨科学]