解剖型和锁定型钢板内固定治疗Ruedi-Allgower Ⅲ型Pilon骨折的手术疗效比较  

Comparison of the clinical effect between anatomic plate and locking plate on the treatment of Pilon fracture of Ruedi-Allgower type Ⅲ

作　　者：黄恪 孙可[2] 

机构地区：[1]天等县人民医院骨科,广西532800 [2]广西壮族自治区人民医院骨科,南宁530021

出　　处：《中国临床新医学》2017年第11期1071-1073,共3页CHINESE JOURNAL OF NEW CLINICAL MEDICINE

摘　　要：目的探讨解剖型和锁定型钢板内固定治疗胫骨远端Ruedi-Allgower Ⅲ型Pilon骨折的疗效。方法回顾性研究2005-10~2015-10收治的80例Ruedi-Allgower Ⅲ型Pilon骨折患者,按内固定治疗方法的不同分为A、B两组各40例。A组接受解剖型钢板内固定治疗;B组接受锁定型钢板内固定治疗。收集术前患者临床基本资料、手术操作时间、骨折愈合时间、临床疗效评估Tornetta评价、Burwell Chamley放射学评价等临床数据并进行对比研究。结果 B组的手术操作时间及骨折愈合时间均显著短于A组(P<0.01)。两组的Tornetta评价及Burwell Chamley放射学评价差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论锁定型钢板内固定可以缩短手术时间和患者术后愈合时间,与解剖型钢板内固定相比更有利于Ruedi-Allgower Ⅲ型Pilon骨折的治疗。Objective To investigate the clinical effect between anatomic plate and locking plate on the treatment of distal tibial Pilon fracture of Ruedi-Allgower type Ⅲ. Methods The clinical data of 80 patients with Pilon fractures of Ruedi-Allgower type Ⅲ treated in our hospital from October 2005 to October 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Group A（ n = 40） underwent anatomic plate internal fixation treatment. Group B（n = 40） received locking plate internal fixation for the treatment. The clinical effects were compared between the two groups. Results The operation time and average healing time of group B was significantly shorter than that of group A（ P 0. 05）. There were no significant differences between the two groups in Tornetta evaluation and Burwell Chamley radiological evaluation（ P 0. 05）. Conclusion Locking plate has shorter healing time and shorter operation time than anatomical plate in the treatment of Pilon fracture of Ruedi-Allgower type Ⅲ.

关 键 词：PILON骨折 胫骨 钢板 内固定 

分 类 号：R683.4[医药卫生—骨科学]