经皮微创内固定技术（MIPO）治疗踝关节骨折的疗效分析

目的比较经皮微创内固定技术（MIPO）与切开复位内固定术（ORIF）治疗踝关节骨折的疗效。方法自2009—01—2012—12对收治的88例成人踝关节骨折根据内固定方法不同分为闭合复位经皮微创空心钉及钢板内固定（MIPO组，38例）和传统切开复位内固定（ORIF组，50例），比较2组手术时间、住院时间、骨折愈合时间、局部并发症发生情况及术后1年AOFAS评分。结果MIPO组在住院时间、切口感染发生率及骨折愈合时间方面明显优于ORIF组，差异有统计学意义（P〈O．05）。88例均获得随访6～36个月，平均18个月。结论与传统切开复位内固定相比，闭合复位经皮微创空心钉及钢板固定技术治疗踝关节骨折具有创伤小、切口美观、固定牢靠、骨折愈合率高、踝关节功能恢复满意的优点。

Minimally invasive percutaneous osteosynthesis for ankle fractures

Objective To compare the curative effects of minimally invasive percutaneous osteosynthesis and traditional open reduction plus internal fixation for ankle fractures. Methods Eighty eight patients who were admitted to our department for ankle fracture from January 2009 to December 2012 were retrospectively analyzed.According to different internal fixation methods, the patients were divided into MIPO group （38 eases） with minimally invasive pereutaneous osteosynthesis and OR_IF group （50 cases） with internal fixation. The operation time,length of stay,fracture healing time,irritative symptoms by internal implants, delayed union, nonunion and infections and the seore of AOFAS at the end of follow-up were compared. Results MIPO group showed significantly shorter stay and less fracture healing time ,and lower rates of incisional infeetion than ORIF group （P 〈0.05）. Follow-ups of 18 months on average revealed that all the eases healed. Conclusion Compared with traditional open reduction with internal fixation, closed reduction with minimally invasive percutaneous osteosynthesis for ankle fractures is a good method with advantages of mini-invasion and rigid fixation,and with the satisfaetory ankle joint funetion and fracture healing rate which should be popularized and applied to clinical widely.