两种不同固定器后路固定胸腰椎骨折的疗效比较  

The clinical experience with posterior fixation of thoracolumbar fractures

作　　者：谈中文 薛健康 陈天健[1] 

机构地区：[1]广元市第一人民医院骨科,四川广元628017

出　　处：《西部医学》2015年第8期1184-1186,1189,共4页Medical Journal of West China

基　　金：四川省卫生厅科研课题(120678)

摘　　要：目的比较经后路途径Steffee钢板和AF钉两种材料复位固定胸腰椎骨折病人疗效差异,以选用最佳材料减少胸腰椎骨折的并发症。方法回顾总结47例胸腰椎骨折患者的临床资料,分为S组23例和A组24例,S组采用Steffe钢板方法,A组采用AF钉方法,比较两组在骨折椎体的平均高度、手术时间、手术出血量、术后引流量和卧床时间等差异,分析手术过程存在的风险和术后恢复情况。结果两组术前年龄、体重、髓神经损伤Frankel分级无明显差异,S组骨折椎体的平均高度为22.1mm,A组骨折椎体平均高度是21mm,无统计学差异(P>0.05)。A组手术时间和手术出血量明显小于S组(P<0.05),A组患者术后引流量和卧床时间情况优于S组(P<0.05),但二者在椎体恢复高度无差异(P>0.05)。结论对于胸椎骨折病人,AF钉固定椎体手术风险小于Steffee钢板,而且术后恢复优于Steffee钢板,具有较高的临床应用价值。Objective Both Steffee plate and AF nail were used for fixation thoracolumbar fractures patients through the posterior approach. Their fixation effects and complications of thoraeolumbar fractures were compared. Methods It was reviewed the clinical data of 47 patients with thoracolumbar fractures. They were divided two groups. 13 patients were fixated by Steffe steel （group S）, and the others were AF nail （group A）. It was objected to analyze the risk in the operation process and postoperative recovery. Results The experiment results indicated that there was no ob- vious difference in ages, weight and nerve injury of Frankel classification before operation. The average fracture vertebral height of group S was 22.1 mm and the other was 21 ram. It was also have no statistical difference. The patients in Group A were significantly less than the group S upon operation time and blood loss, and the former also displayed better condition in post operation flow and bed time, but they were not signification difference in height of vertebral body recov- ery. Conclusion For thoracic vertebra fracture patients, the operation risking of AF nail fixed vertebral is less than that of Steffee plate＇, and postoperative recovery of AF nail fixed vertebra was maybe better than that of Steffee plate.

关 键 词：胸腰椎骨折 后路手术 AF钉 

分 类 号：R681.57[医药卫生—骨科学]