锁定加压钢板与普通加压钢板治疗胫腓骨骨折  

Treatment of locking compression plate and ordinary compression plate to treat tibia and fibula fractures

作　　者：杨永波[1] 周鹰飞[2] 周大凯[1] 李慧宁[1] 

机构地区：[1] 新乡市中心医院,河南新乡453600 [2] 十堰市人民医院

出　　处：《中国伤残医学》2016年第16期8-9,共2页Chinese Journal of Trauma and Disability Medicine

摘　　要：目的：比较锁定加压钢板与普通加压钢板治疗胫腓骨骨折的疗效。方法：回顾性分析101例胫腓骨骨折，其中采用锁定加压钢板（LCP）56例，采用普通加压钢板（OCP）45例。方差分析比较2组的优良率及术后并发症发生率，t检验比较2组骨痂出现时间、骨折愈合时间、手术时间及术中出血量。结果：LCP组平均随访25±2．6个月，OCP组平均随访24±2．8个月。优良率LCP组92．6％，OCP组82．2％，差异有统计学意义（p＜0．05）；LCP组平均骨痂出现时间38．5±4．3天、平均骨折愈合时间150．6±5．5天、平均手术时间43．9±6．6分钟、平均术中出血量183．7±8．8ml，OCP组平均骨痂出现时间47．8±5．6天、平均骨折愈合时间173．2±6．2天、平均手术时间61．9±5．9分钟、平均术中出血量225．3±10．7ml，2组差异有统计学意义（p＜0．05）；并发症中2组在平均感染率、骨不连率及内固定断裂率上LCP组更少，差异有统计学意（ P＜0．05），在平均骨外露率、畸形愈合发生率上2组差异无统计学意义（P＞0．05）。结论：与普通加压钢板（OCP）相比，锁定加压钢板（LCP）更具优势。Objective：To assess the clinical effect of locking compression plate and ordinary compression plate to treat tibia and fibula fracture.Methods：A retrospective analysis was made about 101 patients underwent surgical treatment for tibia and fibula fracture , inclu-ding 56 who underwent LCP （ locking compression plate ） and 45 who underwent OCP （ ordinary compression plate ） .The parameters in-cluded satisfaction rate、postoperative complications rate and average healing time、operation time and amount of bleeding .The data was compared with Student＆#39;s T-test or ANOVA.Results：The mean durations of follow-up were （25 ±2.6） months （LCP） and （24 ±2.8） months （OCP）.The satisfaction rate were 92.6%（LCP） and 82.2%（OCP）.There were significant differences in satisfaction rate （p〈0.05）.The mean callus formation time was significantly less in LCP than OCP group （38.5 ±4.3d and 47.8 ±5.6d, respectively）.The mean fracture healing time was significantly less in LCP than OCP group （150.6 ±5.5d and 173.2 ±6.2d, respectively）.The mean op-eration time was significantly less in LCP than OCP group （43.9 ±6.6min and 61.9 ±5.9min, respectively）.The mean blood loss was significantly less in LCP than OCP group （183.7 ±8.8ml and 225.3 ±10.7ml, respectively）.The mean infection rate, tibial nonunion rate, fracture rate of Internal fixation were significant less in LCP than OCP group .There were no significant differences in exposure rate of the tibia, malunion rate during the follow -up time between the two groups .Conclusion：The locking compression plate had an advan-tage over ordinary compression plate to treat tibia and fibula fractures .

关 键 词：胫腓骨骨折 锁定加压钢板 普通加压钢板 

分 类 号：R683.42[医药卫生—骨科学]