后交叉韧带保留型及替代型假体在全膝关节置换术后早期疗效比较  

Early efficacy of posterior cruciate retaining prosthesis versus substituting prosthesis in total knee arthroplasty

作　　者：罗宇文[1] 刘世桢[1] 周雪明[1] 刘先银[1] 陈庆槐[1] 谢荏棠[1] 成剑文[1] 

机构地区：[1]广东省东莞市人民医院关节骨科,广东东莞523059

出　　处：《广东医科大学学报》2017年第4期381-384,共4页Journal of Guangdong Medical University

摘　　要：目的比较后交叉韧带保留型(CR)及替代型(假体在全膝关节置换术后早期疗效。方法 PR)因晚期膝关节病变而行全膝关节置换术患者69例(72膝),其中38例(40膝)使用CR假体治疗,31例(32膝)使用PS假体治疗。比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后引流量、评分、膝关节活动度。结果 HSS两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后引流量、以及术后2周、3个月、12个月HSS评分和膝关节活动度差异无统计学意义(P。结论 >0.05)两种假体在全膝关节置换术后早期均获得良好疗效。Objective To compare the early efficacy of posterior cruciate retaining （CR） and posterior cruciate substituting （PS） prosthesis in total knee arthroplasty （TKA）. Methods Sixty-nine patients with advanced knee ostearthritis （72 knees） underwent TKA with CR （n=38, 40 knees） or PS （n=31, 32 knees）. Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, and American Hospital for Special Surgery （HSS） knee scores and knee joint activity after operation were compared between 2 groups. Results Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, and HSS knee scores and knee joint activity 2 weeks, 3 months and 12 months after operation showed no significant difference between 2 groups （P〉0.05）. Conclusion The two kinds of prostheses provide good early efficacy in TKA.

关 键 词：全膝关节置换术 骨关节炎 假体 后交叉韧带 

分 类 号：R687.42[医药卫生—骨科学]