摘要
目的：比较改良多功能外固定支架与交锁髓内钉内固定治疗胫腓骨 C 型骨折的临床疗效。方法收集80例胫腓骨 C 型骨折患者，其中40例采用改良多功能外固定支架治疗，另40例采用交锁髓内钉治疗，比较两组的疗效、手术时间、出血量、术后并发症、下地负重时间、骨折愈合时间。结果两组临床疗效优良率比较差异无统计学意义（P ＞0.05）。改良外固定支架治疗组手术时间、出血量、骨折愈合时间均优于交锁髓内钉内固定组（P ＜0.05）。随访1～5年，改良多功能外固定支架治疗组40例患者中，出现针道感染1例，畸形愈合1例；交锁髓内钉内固定组40例患者中，畸形愈合1例，延迟愈合1例。两组均无出现骨折不愈合的病例。结论与交锁髓内钉治疗相比，改良多功能外固定支架治疗胫腓骨 C 型骨折手术时间短、出血量少、骨折愈合快。
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of modified multifunctional external fixation brace and interlocking intramedullary nail in the treatment of type C tibiofibular fractures.Methods Eighty patients with type C fractures of tibia and fibula were enrolled in this study.Forty patients were treated with modified multifunctional external fixation brace,and the other 40 patients received interlocking intramedullary nail.Clinical efficacy,operative time,intraoperative blood loss,postoperative complications,time of leaving bed and time of bone union were statistically compared between two groups.Results No statistical significance was found between two groups in the excellent rate of therapy （P 〉0.05）.Operation time,intraoperative blood loss and time of bone union in modified unilateral multifunctional external fixation brace group were significantly better than those in interlocking intramedullary nail group （all P 〈0.05）.In modified unilateral multifunction-al external fixation brace group,one patient had infection and one had malunion,no patient was delayed union and nonunion.In interlocking intramedullary nail group,one presented with malunion and one had delayed union.No patient suffered from nonunion in both groups.Conclusion Compared with interlocking intramedul-lary nail,modified unilateral multifunctional external fixation brace requires shorter operative time,less intrao-perative blood loss and faster bone union in patients with type C tibiofibular fractures.
出处
《新医学》
2014年第10期691-694,共4页
Journal of New Medicine
关键词
胫腓骨骨折
多功能外固定支架
交锁髓内钉
Tibiofibular fractures
Unilateral multifunctional external fixation brace
Interlocking intramedullary nail
