微创经皮钢板与带锁髓内钉治疗胫骨骨折的比较研究

【摘要】 目的比较微创经皮钢板和带锁髓内钉两种固定方法治疗胫骨骨折的优缺点,为临床治疗提供参考。方法从2002年1月～2004年1月选取本科收住的胫骨骨折病人,随机分为带锁髓内钉固定组和微创经皮钢板内固定组,从手术时间、住院时间、住院费用、骨折临床愈合时间、骨折近期临床疗效等方面进行比较分析。结果微创经皮钢板固定组的手术时间较短、住院费用较低:两组住院时间、骨折临床愈合时间之间、骨折近期临床疗效之间的差别无统计学意义。结论微创经皮钢板固定与带锁髓内钉固定治疗胫骨骨折相比较,前者手术时间短、医疗费用低,较为简单、经济;两者的住院时间、骨折临床愈合时间、骨折近期临床疗效相近,在适应证范围,两者都是治疗胫骨骨折较好的内固定方法。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To discuss the results of treating tibia by minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis and interlocking intramedullary nail in order to offer consults for the clinical choose. Methods From January 2002 to January 2004,sixty six cases of tibia fracture were randomized divided into two groups.One group were treated by minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis,and another group were treated by interlocking intramedullary nail.Five factors including operation time,hospitalization time,hospitalization expenses,fracture clinical healing time and clinical effect in near period of time were studied statistically. Results There were significant difference between two groups in operation time and hospitalization expenses,There were insignificant difference between two groups in hospitalization time,fracture clinical healing time and clinical effect in near period of time. Conclusion Comparing the results between minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis and interlocking intramedullary nail for treatment of tibia fracture,the former’s operation time was shorter and it’s medical expenses was lower.It was simple and economy,The difference between two groups in hospitalization time,fracture clinical healing time and clinical effect in near period of time was insignificant.Both of them were excellent internal fixations for the treatment of tibia fractures in certain indications.更多还原