国产γ钉与InterTan钉内固定治疗股骨转子间骨折的疗效比较  

Efficacy comparison of domestic γ nails and Inter Tan nails in treatment of femoral intertrochanteric fracture

作　　者：赵志彩[1] 李健[1] 王剑[1] 王东亮[1] 石金柱[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京市房山区第一医院骨科,北京102400

出　　处：《临床骨科杂志》2017年第6期720-723,共4页Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics

摘　　要：目的比较国产γ钉与InterTan钉内固定治疗股骨转子间骨折的临床疗效。方法将78例股骨转子间骨折患者按治疗方法分为两组,γ钉组(38例)采用国产γ钉内固定,InterTan钉组(40例)采用InterTan钉内固定。比较两组术中出血量、手术时间、骨折愈合时间、并发症发生率及髋关节功能Harris评分。结果γ钉组32例和InterTan钉组34例获得随访,时间12~18个月。手术时间γ钉组短于InterTan钉组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。术中出血量、骨折愈合时间、并发症发生率及髋关节功能Harris评分方面两组比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论国产γ钉与InterTan钉治疗股骨转子间骨折均可取得良好的疗效。国产γ钉操作简单,适用于内科合并症多、需要缩短手术时间的患者;InterTan钉更适用于骨质较年轻的患者。Objective To compare clinical outcomes of domestic γ nails and InterTan nails in treatment of femoral intertrochanteric fractures.Methods The 78 patients with femoral intertrochanteric fracture were divided into two groups, using domestic γ nails treatment 38 cases, InterTan nails treatment 40 cases.Two groups of intraoperative blood loss, operative time, fracture healing time, complications rate and Harris hip scores of the hip joint function were compared.Results The 32 cases in γ nails group and 34 cases in InterTan nails group were followed up for 12~18 months.The operative time was shorter in domestic γ nails group than InterTan group , with a significant difference （ P〈0.01 ）.However , there were no significant differences between two groups in blood loss , fracture healing time, complications incidence rate and Harris hip scores （P〉0.05）.Conclusions Domestic γ nail and InterTan nail in treatment of femoral intertrochanteric fractures can obtain good clinical outcomes.Each method has its advantages.γ nail has the advantages of simple operation.It is suitable for patients with more medical complications and less operation time requirement.InterTan nail is more suitable for younger patients with relatively good bone quality.

关 键 词：股骨转子间骨折 γ钉固定 InterTan髓内钉固定 

分 类 号：R683.42[医药卫生—骨科学] R687.32[医药卫生—外科学]