【摘要】 目的比较跨关节外固定支架联合有限内固定与钢板内固定治疗桡骨远端粉碎性骨折的临床效果。方法回顾性分析在本院进行治疗的60例桡骨远端粉碎性骨折患者的临床资料,其中29例患者采用跨关节外固定支架联合有限内固定治疗(联合组),31例患者采用钢板内固定术治疗(钢板组)。比较两组的临床疗效。结果两组术后6个月随访腕关节活动度比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。联合组优良率为93.1%,钢板组优良率为93.5%,两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论跨关节外固定支架联合有限内固定与钢板内固定疗效相似,并且具有创伤小等优点,值得临床推广。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To discuss the clinical efficacy of articular external fixation brace combined with limited internal fixation and plates internal fixation for treatment of distal radius comminuted fracture. Methods Clinical data of 60 patients with comminuted fracture distal radius fracture were analyzed.29 cases were treated by articular external fixation brace combined with limited internal fixation(combined group),and 31 cases were treated by plates internal fixation(plate group).Clinical efficacy of two groups was compared. Results Followed-up for 6 month after operation,wrist joint activity showed no significant difference between the two groups(P>0.05).Excellent fracture healing rate of combined group was 93.1%,and of plate group was 93.5%,there was no significant difference between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion Compared with plates internal fixation,articular external fixation brace combined with limited internal fixation for distal radius comminuted fracture shows similar clinical efficacy,advantages of surgical trauma,is worthy of clinical application.更多还原