锁定加压钢板治疗不稳定型桡骨远端骨折

目的 探讨锁定加压钢板(locking compression plate,LCP)治疗不稳定型桡骨远端骨折( distal radial fractures,DRF)的效果。方法 自2006年1月至2008年12月收治不稳定型桡骨远端骨折82例,其中男33例（2例为双侧）,女49例;年龄17～74岁,平均51岁。45岁以上患者中骨质疏松29例,骨量减少21例。骨折根据AO/OTA分型标准：A3型7例,B1型4例,B2型12例,B3型10例,C1型16例,C2型21例,C3型12例。本组61例单纯掌侧入路LCP固定,12例单纯背侧入路LCP固定,5例掌、背侧联合入路掌侧LCP桡侧1/3管状钢板固定,4例掌、背侧联合入路双侧LCP固定。其中辅助外固定支架或克氏针固定19例,尺骨骨折固定7例,骨移植恢复骨缺损39例。结果 术后随访12 ～ 48个月,平均20.7个月。术后并发症包括切口周围出现水泡3例,感染1例,正中神经损伤3例,螺钉过长穿入伸肌间隔4例,骨折复位丢失,螺纹穿入桡腕关节2例,排异反应1例,骨折不愈合1例,创伤性关节炎7例。根据Cooney腕关节评分标准：优56例,良19例,可6例,差1例,优良率为91％。结论 LCP治疗不稳定型DRF安全有效,能够坚强固定,允许早期功能锻炼,尤其适用于骨折压缩粉碎性骨质疏松患者。     

桡骨远端骨折的治疗

桡骨远端骨折在临床上较为常见,如何有效地治疗桡骨远端骨折非常的重要.本文着重从桡骨远端的解剖、分类方法、复位标准、治疗原则进行了叙述,并对当前治疗方法,包括闭合复位外固定、经皮穿针术、外固定架技术、切开复位内固定术、腕关节镜技术、人工腕关节以及植骨技术的应用等及其并发症进行描述,使其对临床工作有一定的指导意义.     

切开复位内固定治疗桡骨远端不稳定骨折

目的 探讨应用切开复位内固定治疗不稳定性桡骨远端骨折的疗效。方法自2007～2008年,作者采用切开复位双钢板内固定方法治疗不稳定性桡骨远端骨折18例20侧,骨折类型按A0分型B2型4侧,B3型5侧,C1型4侧,C2型3侧,C3型4侧。均为闭合性骨折。结果所有患者均得到随访,平均随访13个月（10～22个月）。腕关节功能评价按Sarmiento标准进行评定：切开复位双钢板内固定治疗组优良率为85％。结论对于不稳定性桡骨远端骨折的治疗,切开复位双钢板内固定的疗效十分显著。     

手术治疗桡骨远端复杂骨折的体会

29例桡骨远端骨折伴关节面明显移位患者实行手术治疗,术后指导其功能锻炼,随访其手术效果及晚期并发症。25例效果良好,恢复正常功能,4例出现腕关节疼痛,原因为不正确功能锻炼。桡骨远端骨折伴关节面明显移位患者行手术治疗,恢复关节平整及桡骨远端的解剖与功能锻炼非常重要。     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

目的 根据桡骨小头骨折的不同类型,分别采用切开复位内固定、桡骨头切除、人工桡骨小头置换等方法治疗桡骨小头骨折,并分析其疗效,总结适宜的桡骨小头骨折治疗策略.方法回顾分析1999年11月-2008年5月收治的48例桡骨头骨折(47例患者)的临床资料,其中保守治疗9例(均为Mason Ⅰ型);切开复位内固定治疗28例(Mason Ⅰ型1例,Mason Ⅱ型14例,Mason Ⅲ型13例);桡骨小头切除8例(Mason Ⅲ型3例,Mason Ⅳ型5例);桡骨小头置换3例(Mason Ⅳ型).结果 平均随访2.6年(1～4.4年),2例桡骨小头置换分别随访6个月和3个月.按照Mayo肘关节功能评分评价其疗效,保守治疗优良率为8/9,切开复位内固定优良率为82%(23/28),桡骨头切除优良率为6/8,人工假体置换优良率为3/3.结论 桡骨小头骨折应该尽量达到解剖复位以方便早期的功能锻炼.Mason Ⅰ型骨折町以采用保守治疗;MasonⅡ型、Mason Ⅲ型和部分Mason Ⅳ型骨折可以采用切开复位内固定治疗;部分Mason Ⅳ型骨折无法通过内固定达到稳定固定的,可以选择单纯桡骨头切除或人工桡骨头假体置换.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨小头骨折的治疗

Objective To treat radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation, removal of the radial head and artificial joint replacement based on different fracture types to discuss the outcome of these methods and summarize optimal strategy for treatment of radial head fractures. Meth-ods A retrospective study was done on data of 47 patients with 48 radial head fractures treated in our de-partment from November 1999 to May 2008. Among them, nine patients were treated conservatively (all type Mason Ⅰ fractures), 28 treated with open reduction and internal fixation (one patient with type Ma-son Ⅰ fracture, 14 with type Mason Ⅱ and 13 with type Mason Ⅲ), eight with removal of radial head (three patients with type Mason Ⅲ fractures and five with type Ⅳ) and three with artificial joint replace-ment (all type Mason Ⅳ fractures). Results All patients were followed up for average 2.8 years (1-4.4 years). Two patients treated with artificial joint replacement were followed up for six months and three months respectively. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, the excellence rate was 8/9 in conservative treatment, 82% (23/28) in open reduction and internal fixation, 6/8 in removal of the radial head and 3/3 in artificial joint replacement respectively. Conclusions The radial head fracture should be given anatomical reduction for early functional exercise. Conservative treatment can be used for type Mason Ⅰ fractures, open reduction and internal fixation for type Mason Ⅱ , type Mason Ⅲ fractures and part of type Mason Ⅳ fractures. The removal of radial head or mental prosthesis replacement are al-ternative for parte of type Mason Ⅳ fractures that can not attain stable fixation through open reduction and internal fixation.     

桡骨头骨折合并尺侧副韧带损伤的手术治疗

目的 分析桡骨头骨折合并尺侧副韧带损伤的治疗方法及其疗效. 方法 对2004年8月-2011年1月收治的桡骨头骨折伴尺侧副韧带损伤行手术治疗的38例患者进行随访,其中24例获得随访且资料完整.按改良Mason分型:Ⅱ型6例,Ⅲ型15例,Ⅳ型3例.分别采用普通螺钉、Herbert钉、空心螺钉、可吸收钉及微型钢板固定,骨折粉碎严重行桡骨头置换术.侧副韧带复合体的修复采用直接缝合,如不能缝合则重建韧带. 结果 本组获得10～ 84个月随访,平均37.1个月.按Mayo肘关节功能评分评定:优18例,良4例,一般2例,优良率为92％.结论 对于MasonⅡ型以上的桡骨头骨折合并尺侧副韧带损伤患者,应首选桡骨头重建术,不能重建应行桡骨头置换.桡骨头重建术中在修复其他合并损伤后肘关节仍出现外翻不稳定,应对尺侧副韧带进行修复或重建.桡骨头置换术中应Ⅰ期修复及重建肘关节桡尺侧副韧带.     

不稳性寰椎骨折的外科治疗策略

目的 探讨枕颈或寰枢椎内固定融合技术治疗不稳性寰椎骨折的临床疗效和应用价值.方法 对2004年10月-2009年3月收治的不稳性寰椎骨折38例进行回顾性分析,其中6例寰椎爆裂性骨折合并寰枕关节不稳(5例行C0～C2固定融合术,其中1例同时合并有C7椎体压缩性骨折行C0～C3固定融合术),7例典型的Jefferson骨折,3例半环骨折,8例寰椎骨折合并Ⅱ型齿状突骨折,3例寰椎骨折合并Hangman骨折(其中2例Levine-Edwards Ⅲ型行C0～C3固定融合术,1例Ⅱ型行C1～C2固定融合术),3例寰椎骨折合并下颈椎损伤,6例寰椎横韧带断裂(Dickman Ⅰ型)伴寰枢关节不稳,2例寰椎粉碎性骨折合并寰椎侧块内侧骨性结构附着处横韧带撕裂(DickmanⅡ型).5例行C0～C2固定融合术,3例行C0～C3固定融合术,30例行C1～C2固定术并行自体髂骨植骨融合.结果 所有患者术后均获得随访,平均随访时间为28个月(12～46个月).临床症状均得到不同程度的改善.平均手术时间135 min(80～190 min),平均失血量460ml(200～3 300 ml),平均透视时间60 s.38例患者术中均未发生神经、椎动脉和其他手术相关并发症.全部患者均于术后3 d颈托固定后下地行走;术后脊髓损伤症状无加重.3例因电刀灼伤C1～C2间血管静脉丛导致出血,行止血纱布、脑棉片填塞止血,未出现颅脑缺血症状.复查X线片和CT未发现上颈椎失稳或复位丢失,螺钉位置良好,无松动、断钉,寰枢椎或枕颈部均获骨性融合.在晚期随访中,4例(11%)有颈部疼痛和僵硬感,1例枕神经痛.结论 对具有不稳定性寰椎骨折或合并寰椎横韧带损伤的患者,采用枕颈或寰枢椎内固定融合技术及短期外固定对于重建上颈椎永久稳定性是较好的手术方式,并且能阻止神经和脊髓功能的进一步损伤.

Abstract：

Objective To evaluate the clinical effect and safety of the occiput-cervicle or C1-C2 internal fixation and bone graft fusion in treatment of the unstable atlas fracture.Methods A retrospective study was performed in 38 patients with unstable atlas fractures treated by the occiput-cervicle or C1-C2 internal fixation and bone graft fusion from October 2004 to March 2009.Six patients with comminuted atlas fracture combined with instability of the occipito-atlantoid articulations were treated with occiput-C2 fusion(five patients)and with occiput-C3 fusion(one patient).There were seven patients with typical Jefferson fractures,three with semiring fractures,eight with atlas fractures combined with Anderson type Ⅱ odontoid process fractures,three with atlas fractures combined with Hangman's fractures (two patients with Levine and Edwards type Ⅲ Hangman's fractures were treated with occiput-C3 fusion and one patient Levine and Edwards type Ⅱ Hangman's fracture was treated with C1-C2 fusion),three with atlas fracture combined with lower cervicle injury,six with rupture of transverse ligament combined with instability of atlanto-axial joint(Dickman transverse ligament type Ⅰ injury)and two with comminuted fracture of the lateral mass associated with bony avulsion of the medial tubercle and transverse ligament(Dickman transverse ligament type Ⅱ injury).Of all,five patients were treated with occiput-C2 fusion,three treated with occiput-C3 fusion and 30 treated with C1-C2 fusion.Results All the patients were followed up for a range of 12-46 months(average 28 months),which showed improvement of clinical symptoms in some extent postoperatively.The operation time ranged from 80 to 190 min ates(average 135 minates),with intraoperative blood loss for 200-3 300 ml(average 460 ml)and average fluoroscopic time for 60 seconds.There were no neurological deficits,vertebral artery related complications or other complications in all the patients during the surgical operation.No neurological deficit was aggravated after the patient's mobilization with brace three days after operation.The enous plexus of blood vessel at C1-C2 rupture induced by the use of electrocautery was found in three patients who showed no cerebral hemodynamic deficit after hemostasis with hemostatic sponge and cotton piece.The follow-up X-ray and CT manifested osseous fusion in all the patients,with no looseness or breakage of the screws.The late follow-up showed pain associated with movement and limited range of motion in four patients(11%)and occipital neuralgia in one.Conclusions An occiput-cervicle fixation fusion or a C1-C2 fixation fusion combined with short external fixation can reestablish the upper cervical stability and prevent further injury of the spinal cord and nerve function and hence is an ideal option for C1 burst fracture with or without rupture of the transverse ligament.     

桡骨远端复杂关节内骨折两种治疗策略疗效分析

目的 比较研究锁定加压钢板(LCP)与克氏针结合外固定支架治疗桡骨远端复杂关节内骨折的疗效及适应证. 方法 分别以LCP和克氏针结合外固定支架治疗复杂的桡骨远端关节内骨折共98例,对术后手的握持力、腕关节各方向活动度等方面进行回顾性评估和比较,初步评价其临床疗效. 结果 随访4～20个月,平均12.4个月,均获得骨折愈合.参照1990年纽约骨科医院腕关节评估标准,对于AO/ASIF分型C1、C2型骨折,LCP组与克氏针结合外固定支架组疗效比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),C3型骨折克氏针结合外固定支架疗效优越(P<0.05).结论对于闭合性桡骨远端C1、C2型骨折,可选择掌侧LCP或克氏针结合外固定支架固定.而对于远端粉碎严重的C3型骨折,选择克氏针结合外固定支架疗效相对优越.     

钢板内固定与经皮克氏针固定治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效比较

目的 比较切开复位钢板内固定和经皮克氏针固定治疗桡骨远端骨折的临床疗效.方法选取2002年1月-2007年6月收治的110例行切开复位内固定的桡骨远端骨折患者,选取同期107例行经皮克氏针固定的患者,随访比较两组临床疗效. 结果 所有患者随访5-12个月,按Gartland和Werley评分标准,钢板内固定组的优良率为86.4%,经皮克氏针固定组优良率为74.8%(P<0.05).而C3型骨折单独比较,两组优良率分别为76.9%和70.0%(P>0.05). 结论 切开复位内固定治疗桡骨远端骨折总体临床疗效优于经皮克氏针组,但治疗C3型骨折疗效欠佳.     

股骨远端复杂骨折的手术治疗

目的 探讨如何根据股骨远端复杂骨折的不同类型选择适当的内固定方法，以达到最佳的治疗效果。方法 回顾分析1999年1月-2002年6月62例64侧股骨远端复杂骨折手术治疗的临床资料。采用AO分类法，其中A型骨折20例2l侧，C型骨折42例43侧；应用AO股骨髁支撑钢板18例19侧，髁支撑钢板与超高分子聚乙烯板互锁组合固定20例2l侧，股骨逆行交锁髓内钉固定24例，术后进行科学合理的康复治疗。结果 62例骨折经术后4—38个月随访，骨折均获愈合，愈合时间10周～16个月，平均4．2个月。按Kolmert和Wulff的评价标准，优3l侧，良17侧，可11侧，差5侧，优良率为75％。结论 采用合理可靠的内固定方法治疗股骨远端复杂骨折，多数疗效满意。髁支撑钢板适用于股骨远端各型骨折；股骨逆行交锁髓内钉是治疗A型和C1型骨折的首选方法；钢板与聚乙烯板互锁组合固定是治疗C2和C3型骨折的有效方法，其设计合理、操作方便、固定可靠，疗效优于髁支撑钢板和股骨逆行交锁髓内钉。     

手术治疗复杂桡骨远端骨折

目的 探讨治疗复杂桡骨远端骨折(AO分型的B型和C型)的方法. 方法 2005年6月-2007年6月手术治疗78例(83侧)复杂桡骨远端骨折,男51例,女27例;平均年龄34.6岁.按AO分型:B1型12侧,B2、B3型22侧,C1型21侧,C2型16侧,C3型12侧.手术采用切开直视下关节面复位、撬拨复位植骨支撑矫止桡骨远端掌倾角和尺偏角、应用外固定支架固定等方法. 结果 全部患者得到随访,平均随访时间10.5个月.术后关节面塌陷、移位均＜2 mm,掌倾角平均10.6°,尺偏角学均20.3°全部骨性愈合,以Garland and Werley评分方法评定腕关节功能:优33侧,良41侧,可7侧,差2侧,优良率89%. 结论 手术治疗可使关节而复位、可矫止掌倾角和尺偏角,应用外固定支架消除了前臂的轴向短缩应力,足治疗桡骨远端复杂骨折的有效疗法.     

结构性植骨在复杂桡骨远端骨折骨缺损中的应用

目的 探讨采用结构性自体髂骨移植治疗高能量损伤所致伴有关节面的塌陷与干骺端粉碎缺损的桡骨远端骨折的疗效。 方法 选取2007年1月-2010年10月就诊的桡骨远端骨折(AO分类C3型)患者38例,克氏针临时维持固定,使桡腕关节面、桡骨远端长度、掌倾角最大限度恢复。根据骨缺损的形态,取自体3层皮质骨髂骨块嵌入软骨下骨支撑植骨,并取少量松质骨植骨填塞顶压塌陷关节面,尽可能使关节面解剖复位,重建桡骨远端解剖形态。采用改良Gartland和Werley评分标准评定腕关节功能恢复情况。 结果 随访12～ 38个月,无钢板断裂和医源性神经血管损伤。本组骨折愈合时间15～22周,平均18.3周。部分患者经功能康复锻炼后腕关节功能明显改善。按改良Garland和Werley功能评估系统进行疗效评定,优良率为87％。随访中2例患者桡骨远端高度进行性丢失,2例患者桡腕关节面中央凹陷型塌陷,有严重的腕关节屈伸功能障碍。 结论高能量损伤所致复杂桡骨远端骨折需恢复桡腕关节面、桡骨远端长度、掌倾角,采用结构性自体髂骨移植能有效支撑植骨和维持桡腕关节面的平整,恢复桡骨远端的解剖形态,促进腕关节功能的恢复。     

囊内复位手术治疗桡骨远端粉碎性骨折

目的探讨囊内复位在桡骨远端粉碎性骨折手术治疗中的应用和临床效果。方法2003年1月-2005年10月收治37例粉碎l生桡骨远端骨折患者，按AO原则分类，采用囊内复位技术进行治疗，根据不同的骨折类型分别采用锁定加压钢板内固定及外固定架固定，治疗效果通过腕关节功能改善及x线片检测进行评价。结果37例患者全部获得随访，x线片显示骨折均愈合满意。采用Gartland和Werley评分系统评估腕关节功能，优26例，良8例，中2例，差1例，优良率92％。结论切开囊内复位治疗桡骨远端粉碎性骨折，有利于骨折更快愈合和腕关节功能的恢复。     

解剖型胫骨髓内钉治疗胫骨远端骨折的临床研究

目的 评估解剖型胫骨髓内钉(expert tibial nail,ETN)治疗胫骨远端骨折的临床疗效.方法 选择2007年10月-2008年6月采用ETN治疗的胫骨远端骨折患者13例,其中男8例,女5例;年龄25～47岁,平均33.8岁.骨折按国际内固定研究协会(AO/ASIF)分型:43-A1型3例,43-B1型4例,43-B2型4例,43-C1型2例.除3例Gustilo-Anderson Ⅰ型开放性骨折,其余均为闭合性骨折.对其临床资料进行分析,并评估其临床疗效.结果 所有患者术后随访3～13个月(平均8.4个月),均达到解剖复位并获得稳定固定.术后均愈合良好,无ETN断裂、伤口感染、骨折不愈合或肢体短缩等并发症发生.所有患者按Johner-Wruhs标准进行功能评分,其中优10例,良3例.结论 与常规切开复位钢板内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折相比,ETN具有微创、软组织损伤轻、手术时间短、固定可靠、术后康复锻炼早、功能恢复快等优点.

Abstract：

Objective To study the clinical effect of expert tibial nail (ETN) in the treatment of distal tibial fractures. Methods From October 2007 to June 2008,ETN was performed in 13 patients with distal tibial fractures. There were eight males and five females, at age range of 25-47 years (33.8 on average). According to AO/ASIF classification, there were three patients with 43-A1 fractures, four with 43-B1 fractures, four with 43-B2 fractures and two with 43-C1 fractures. All the patients were with close fractures except for three patients with Gustilo-Anderson type Ⅰ fractures. Their clinical data were analyzed for assessing the clinical effect of ETN. Results All patients were followed up for a mean time of 8.4 months (range 3-13 months), which showed that all the fractures obtained stable fixation and sound healing, with no complications like breakage of ETN, wound infection, fracture nonunion or limb shortening. According to Johner-Wruhs standard, the functional results were excellent in 10 patients and good in three. Conclusion ETN has advantages of minimal invasion, shorter operation time, stronger fixation,better soft tissue protection and better functional recovery for distal tibial fractures in comparison with traditional open reduction and buttress plate fixation.