双锁定钢板和Y形钢板内固定手术治疗肱骨髁间C型骨折的临床效果比较  

Comparion of the clinical effects between double locking compression plate and Y shape plate in the treatment of type C humeral intercondylar fracture

作　　者：黄崇友 陈万[2] 陈卫民 黎启福 

机构地区：[1]东莞市高埗医院骨科,广东523270 [2]中国人民解放军第三军医大学西南医院骨科,重庆400038

出　　处：《中国临床新医学》2016年第7期590-593,共4页CHINESE JOURNAL OF NEW CLINICAL MEDICINE

摘　　要：目的探讨双锁定钢板和Y形钢板内固定手术治疗肱骨髁间C型骨折的临床疗效。方法选取该院骨科2009-02~2013-03获得完整随访资料的肱骨髁间C型骨折46例,其中行双锁定钢板固定28例,行Y形钢板固定18例,均采用肘后劈开三角肌入路,术后采用Mayo肘关节评分系统评定疗效,并采用SPSS19.0统计软件包进行分析。结果所有患者术后获15~42个月（24.3个月）随访。Y形钢板组优良率为50.0%,双锁定钢板组优良率为85.7%,两组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论肱骨髁间C型骨折采用双锁定钢板内固定比Y形钢板内固定治疗更具有优越性,更有利于肘关节功能的早期康复,更能有效减少并发症发生。Objective To investigate the clinical outcomes of double locking compression plate and Y shape plate in the treatment of type C humeral intercondylar fractures. Methods Forty-six patients with type C humeral intercondylar fractures from February 2009 to March 2013,were included in this study. Twenty-eight cases were taken as double locking compression group,and 18 cases were taken as Y shape plate group according to the different surgical methods. Both of the two groups used the same surgical approach during which the deltoid muscle behind elbow was split. The clinical outcomes were assessed by Mayo Elbow Scores and the data were analyzed by SPSS19. 0. Results The excellent and good rate of double locking compression group（ 85. 7%） was significantly elevated than that of Y shape plate group（ 50. 0%） after a follow-up period of 15 ~ 42 months with an average of 24. 3 months. Conclusion Double locking compression plate is better than Y shape plate in the treatment of type C humeral intercondylar fractures.

关 键 词：肱骨髁间骨折 双钢板固定 Y形钢板固定 

分 类 号：R68[医药卫生—骨科学]