【摘要】 目的探讨钉板内固定系统治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的疗效。方法随访分析自2004年1月～2009年1月内固定治疗145例股骨粗隆间骨折,其中93例采用动力髋螺钉(DHS),18例采用动力髁螺钉(DCS),34例采用股骨近端解剖型锁定钢板治疗。记录骨折愈合时间、并发症及Harris髋关节功能评分。结果本组随访12～30个月。DHS组中有6例出现髋内翻;股骨近端解剖型锁定钢板组中有4例出现髋内翻,1例近端锁钉断裂,出现髋内翻,经非手术治疗后骨折愈合,1例钢板断裂,骨折移位,再次手术后骨折愈合。三组骨折愈合时间及Harris髋关节功能评分优良率无明显差异。结论合适的内固定选择、术中良好复位及内侧支撑结构的复位与固定对治疗至关重要。三种钉板内固定系统有各自的特点和适应证。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To analyze the clinical effects of three nail and plate systems in treating femoral intertrochanteric fractures.Methods One hundred and forty five patients with femoral intertrochanteric fractures treated by internal fixation were followed up from January 2004 to January 2009.Totally 93 patients were treated with dynamic hip screw(DHS),18 patients were treated with dynamic condyle screw(DCS) and 34 patients were treated with anatomical proximal femoral locking plate.Fracture union time,complications and hip function scores according to Harris’s scoring system were recorded.Results All patients were followed up for 12 to 30 months.Six patients appeared coxa vara in DHS group and four in anatomical proximal femoral locking plate group.One case occurred proximal locking screw collapsed and the patient appeared coxa vara in anatomical proximal femoral locking plate group,however,the fracture was healed after conservation therapy.Another case appeared locking plate broken and the fracture was displaced,after all,the fracture was healed after another operation.There were no significant difference in fracture union time and the excellent and good rate of hip function scores.Conclusion A suitable internal fixation,good reduction,reduction and internal fixation of medical backstand are very important.Three nail and plate systems have their own advantages and indications.更多还原