髋动力锁定钢板与动力髋螺钉内固定治疗股骨转子间骨折的比较

背景：动力髋螺钉已成为治疗股骨转子间骨折的标准内固定物,国内外应用较广泛。解剖型髋动力带锁钢板是一种新型的髋部内固定装置。目的：回顾性分析比较应用两种内固定置入物器材在手术时间、术中出血量及临床疗效等方面的差异。方法：抽取吉林省吉林市中心医院骨二科收治的采用动力髋螺钉和髋动力锁定钢板行内固定治疗并获随访的股骨转子间骨折患者50例,观察手术时间、出血量、临床愈合时间、手术后Harris评分及并发症等指标。结果与结论：解剖型髋动力带锁钢板组内固定时间短于动力髋螺钉组（P〈0.05）,内固定过程中出血量少于动力髋螺钉组（P〈0.05）。两组骨折愈合时间差异无显著性意义（P〉0.05）。解剖型髋动力带锁钢板组Harris评分优良率92%（22/24）,动力髋螺钉组优良率为88%（23/26）,两组间比较差异有显著性意义（P〈0.05）。结果表明,应用解剖型髋动力带锁钢板系统具有内固定可靠,手术时间及出血少,骨量丢失少等优点,是一种治疗转子间骨折的有效方法。

Anatomical dynamic hip locking plate versus dynamic hip screw for intertrochanteric femoral fracture

BACKGROUND：Dynamic hip screw （DHS） has been widely used to treat intertrochanteric femoral fracture （IFF）.Anatomical dynamic hip locking plate （ADHLP） is a novel hip internal fixation device.OBJECTIVE：To compare and assess the treatment of IFF by ADHLP and DHS in operative time,blood loss and clinical effect.METHODS：A total of 50 patients with IFF were selected from Department of Orthopedics,Jilin Central Hospital,who had been treated by two internal fixation operations （DHS and ADHLP）.The data of two groups were collected for statistical analysis on the following aspects：operative time,blood loss,clinical healing time of fracture,postoperative complications and Harris Hip scores.RESULTS AND CONCLUSION：The operating time of ADHLP was shorter than DHS （P0.05）,and the intraoperative bleeding was less than DHS group （P0.05）.There was no significant difference in bone healing time between the two groups （P0.05）.The excellent and good rate in Harris score was 92% （22/24） in ADHLP group,greater than in DHS group （88%,23/26;P0.05）.Compared to DHS,ADHLP is a reliable internal fixation method with shorter operating time and less bleeding,less bone loss,and can be used as an effective method for IFF.