锁定钢板和PFNA治疗股骨粗隆间骨折对比

目的比较分析锁定钢板法与股骨近端髓内钉（PFNA）法治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的疗效。方法回顾性分析2011年7月至2012年6月我院骨科门诊收治的148例接受股骨粗隆间骨折患者临床资料，依骨折分型分为行股骨近端锁定钢板手术治疗的对照组72例，和行PFNA法内固定治疗的PFNA组76例，比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、骨折愈合时间和术后髋关节功能恢复程度。结果PFNA组与对照组在术中出血量、卧床时间、平均骨折愈合时间等指标上比较差异有统计学意义（P〈O．05），在手术时间上对比差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。两组在术后髋关节功能恢复优良率方面差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论锁定钢板法和PFNA法均是治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的有效方法，但相比PFNA法创伤小，术中出血量少，尤其适用于不稳定粗隆间骨折伴骨质疏松的老年患者。

Comparison of Locking Plate and PFNA Treatment for Intertrochanteric Fractures

Objective To compare and analyze the effect of locking plate and proximal femoral nail anti-rotation （PFNA） in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. Methods The clinical data of 148 cases of intertrochanteric fractures patients in the Department of Orthopaedics of our hospital from July 2011 to June 2012 were analyzed retrospectively. According to their fracture types, 72 cases were divided into the control group receiving proximal femoral locking plate surgical treatment, and 76 cases into the PFNA group receiving PFNA fixation. Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, fracture healing time, and the degree of hip joint functional recovery of the two groups were compared. Results Intraoperative blood loss, bed rest time, and average fracture healing time of the two groups were of significant difference （P 〈0.05）, while the operation time and degree of postoperative hip joint functional recovery were not significantly different （P 〉0.05）. Conclusions Locking plate method and PFNA treatment are both effective for intertrochanteric fracture. However, with less trauma and blood loss, PFNA treatment is more suitable for unstable intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients with osteoporosis.