股骨干骨折髓内与髓外固定方法的比较与疗效分析  

Comparison Between Intramedullary and Extramedullary Fixation of Femoral Shaft Fractures and Their Efficacy Analysis

作　　者：张立军[1] 高守达 杨媛[1] ZHANG Lijun;GAO Shouda;YANG Yuan(Department of Orthopaedics,Ji＇nan Fifth People＇s Hospital,Ji＇nan Shandong 250022,China)

机构地区：[1]济南市第五人民医院骨科,山东济南250022

出　　处：《中国卫生标准管理》2018年第13期79-81,共3页China Health Standard Management

摘　　要：目的通过对比治疗股骨干骨折的三种常用方法的疗效,为临床实践提供依据。方法选取我院自2013年1月—2017年8月收治的股骨干骨折患者120例,随机分为A、B、C三组,对A组患者行闭合复位交锁髓内钉内固定术,对B组患者行切开复位交锁髓内钉内固定术,对C组患者行切开复位LCP内固定术。对每位患者在手术期间的临床数据以及综合疗效进行记录并统计分析。结果 A组患者的各种临床指标均优于B、C组(P<0.05)。B、C两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但是B组的术中出血量要少于C组(P<0.05)。结论闭合复位交锁髓内钉内固定术治疗股骨干骨折的效果要优于切开复位LCP内固定术和切开复位交锁髓内钉内固定术,是目前治疗股骨干骨折较为理想的手术方法。Objective By comparing the efficacy of three methods in the treatment of femoral shaft fractures, to provide a basis for clinical practice. Methods 120 cases of femoral shaft patients in our hospital from January 2013 to August 2017 were randomly divided into A, B, and C group. Closed reduction interlocking intramedullary nail was performed on group A. In group B, open reduction and interlocking intramedullary nail was performed. In group C, open reduction and LCP internal fixation was performed. The clinical data and the combined effect of each patient during surgery was record and statistically analyzed. Results All clinical indicators in group A were better than those in group B and C（P〈0.05）. There was no significant statistics difference between group B and C, but the intraoperative blood loss wasless in group B than group C（P〈0.05）. Conclusion Closed reduction with locking intramedullary nail for the treatment of femoral shaft fractures is superior to open reduction and LCP internal fixation and open reduction interlocking intramedullary nailing. It is currently the ideal surgical method for the treatment of femoral shaft fractures.

关 键 词：股骨干骨折 切开复位 闭合复位 交锁髓内钉 锁定加压钢板 临床疗效 

分 类 号：R683[医药卫生—骨科学]