不同方法治疗距腓前韧带急性断裂对比分析  

Different methods to treat acute talofibular ligaments before fracture analysis

作　　者：高燕[1] 刘成[1] 马骁[1] Gao Yan;Liu Cheng;horse Xiao(The people's liberation army 253 hospital orthopaedics Hohhot in Inner Mongolia in010051)

机构地区：[1]解放军253医院骨科,内蒙古呼和浩特010051

出　　处：《世界中医药》2017年第A02期253-253,共1页World Chinese Medicine

基　　金：全军医学科技青年培育项目(13QNP014)

摘　　要：目的 对比3种方法治疗急性距腓前韧带断裂的临床效果。方法2008年7月~2012年2月，运用三种方法治疗急性距腓前韧带断裂患者82例，其中采用石膏固定法31例(Ⅰ组)，带线锚钉缝合法28例(Ⅱ组)，腓骨骨膜翻转结合带线锚钉缝合23例(Ⅲ组)。所有患者术后12个月后(包括12个月)按美国AOFAS足踝评分标准进行关节功能评定。结果本组82例患者均获得随访，时间13~16个月(平均l4.7±1.4个月)，Ⅱ、Ⅲ组疗效优于Ⅰ组(P<0.05)，Ⅱ、Ⅲ组间疗效差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论治疗急性距腓前韧带断裂，运用带线锚钉手术修复损伤韧带比石膏固定法更具有优势。Objective Compared three methods for treatment of acute talofibular ligament rupture before.Methods in July,2008-February2012,using three methods to treat82cases of patients with acute talofibular ligament rupture before,including31cases by cast immobilization method(Ⅰgroup),28cases with line nail suture anchor(Ⅱgroup),fibula periosteum of turning belt line nail suture anchor23cases(Ⅲgroup).All of the patients after more than12months(12months)joint function AOFAS ankle criteria were assessed according to the United States.Results Of all82patients were followed up,13to16months(average l4.7+/-1.4months),Ⅱ,Ⅲcurative effect is better than that ofⅠgroup(Z=2.346,P=0.007;Z=2.467,P=0.011),Ⅱ,there was no statistically significant difference effect betweenⅢgroup(Z=0.103,P=0.103).Conclusion The treatment of acute talofibular ligament rupture,before using the belt line anchor nail surgery to repair ligament damage method has more advantages than cast immobilization.

关 键 词：距腓前韧带 踝 创伤和损伤 手术 

分 类 号：R686.5[医药卫生—骨科学]