期刊文献+

脊柱骨折后路手术内固定治疗的效果初评 被引量:1

Preliminary Results of Posterior in Ternal Fixation for the Treatment of Spinal Fracture
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的研究脊柱骨折后路手术内固定治疗的效果。方法研究资料方便选自2013年6月—2015年2月该院收治的脊柱骨折患者100例,根据随机数字表法,分为两组,后路术组和常规术组。常规术组施以传统手术;后路术组施以脊柱骨折后路手术内固定手术。就两组患者实施前后疼痛评分、Cobb角和手术优良率进行比较。结果后路术组手术优良率高于常规术组,χ2检验显示差异有统计学意义,P<0.05。术前两组疼痛评分、Cobb角差异不大,P>0.05;术后后路术组患者疼痛评分、Cobb角优于常规术组,t检验显示差异有统计学意义,P<0.05。结论脊柱骨折后路手术内固定治疗的效果确切,可有效减轻患者痛苦,提高患者骨折后康复优良率,值得推广。 Objective To study the effect of posterior approach in treatment of spinal fractures.Methods Convenient selection the data of 100 patients with spinal fracture in our hospital from February 2015 to June 2013 were divided into 2groups according to the random number table. Conventional surgery group was treated with conventional surgery; posterior approach surgery was carried out in patients with spinal fractures.Compared with the two groups before and after the implementation of pain score, Cobb angle and the excellent rate of surgery were compared. Results The excellent rate of posterior surgery group was higher than that of the conventional surgery group, χ^2 test showed statistical difference, P〈0.05. Preoperative two groups of pain score, Cobb angle difference is not big, P〉0.05;after the surgery group patients pain score,Cobb angle is superior to the conventional group,t test shows that there is statistical difference, P〈0.05. Conclusion The effect of internal fixation in the treatment of spinal fracture after posterior operation is exact,which can effectively reduce the pain of patients, improve the recovery rate of patients after fracture,it is worth promoting.
作者 康久杰
出处 《中外医疗》 2016年第16期70-71,共2页 China & Foreign Medical Treatment
关键词 脊柱骨折后路手术 内固定治疗 效果 Posterior operation of spinal Fracture internal fixation Effect
  • 相关文献

参考文献8

二级参考文献47

  • 1袁文.胸腰椎骨折外科治疗相关问题探讨[J].中华创伤杂志,2006,22(1):8-10. 被引量:65
  • 2沈惠良,曹立,宋红星,雍宜民.前、后路手术治疗胸腰段爆裂骨折的疗效比较[J].中华创伤骨科杂志,2006,8(1):16-19. 被引量:19
  • 3本刊编辑部,杨子明,郭昭庆,党耕町.胸腰椎骨折诊断与治疗热点问题高峰论坛纪要[J].中华外科杂志,2006,44(8):505-508. 被引量:49
  • 4Alderson P, Green S, Higgins JPT, et al. Cochrane reviewers' handbook 4.2. 1//The Cochrane Library, Issue 1. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons ,2004.
  • 5Wood KB, Bohn D, Mehbod A. Anterior versus posterior treatment of stable thoracolumbar burst Fractures without neurelogic deficit: a prospective, randomized study. J Spinal Disord Tech, 2005, 18 Suppl: S15-23.
  • 6Esses SI, Botsford DJ, Kostuik JP. Evaluation of surgical treatment for burst fractures. Spine, 1990,15 : 667-673.
  • 7Stancic MF, Gregorovic E, Nozica E, et al. Anterior decompression and fixation versus posterior reposition and semirigid fixation in the treatment of unstable burst thoracolumbar fracture: prospective clinical trial. Croat Med J, 2001, 42: 49-53.
  • 8Sasso RC, Renkens K, Hanson D, et al. Unstable thoracolumbar burst fractures : anterior-only versus short-segment posterior fixation. J Spinal Disord Tech, 2006, 19 : 242-248.
  • 9Hitchon PW Torner J, Elchholz KM, et al. Comparion of anterolaieral and posterior approaches in the management of thoracolumbar burst fractures. J Neurosurg Spine, 2006, 5 : 117- 125.
  • 10Danisa OA, Shaffrey CI, Jane JA, et al. Surgical approaches for the correction of unstable thoracolumbar burst fractures: a retrospective analysis of treatment outcomes. J Neurosurg, 1995, 83:977-983.

共引文献78

同被引文献5

引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部