AO/ASIF锁定加压接骨板治疗桡骨远端不稳定骨折

目的　观察比较切开复位AO/ASIF锁定加压接骨板 (lockingcompressionplate,LCP)内固定术治疗桡骨远端不稳定骨折的临床疗效。　方法　回顾性分析 4 1例桡骨远端不稳定骨折患者 ,2 0例行切开复位LCP内固定术 ,其中A3 2例 ,B12例 ,B2 2例 ,C12例 ,C2 4例 ,C3 8例 ;2 1例行传统的手法复位石膏托外固定 ,其中A2 4例、A3 8例、B13例、B3 1例、C13例、C2 2例。　结果　 4 0例获得随访 ,平均随访 7个月 (4～ 12个月 )。两组患者除 1例死亡外均获得临床愈合。Aro评价 :LCP组优 3例 ,良 14例 ,可 1例 ,差 1例 ;传统手法复位组优 2例 ,良 11例 ,可 6例 ,差 2例。术后两组患者在桡骨高度的恢复以及前臂旋转功能的恢复上差异具有显著性意义 (P <0 .0 5 )。　结论　切开复位AO/ASIFLCP内固定术治疗桡骨远端不稳定骨折的临床疗效优于传统手法复位石膏托外固定。

AO/ASIF locking compression plate for unstable distal radial fractures

Objective To evaluate the clinical effect of open reduction and internal fixation with locking compression plate (LCP) for unstable distal radial fractures so as to make comparison with traditional minapulis osteosynthesis. Methods A retrospective study was performed in 41 cases with unstable distal radial fractures, of which 20 cases were treated by open reduction with LCP (including two cases of A 3, two B 1, two B 2, two C 1, four C 2 and eight C 3) and 21 by traditional minapulis osteosynthesis and fixated with plaster cast (including four cases of A 2, eight A 3, three B 1, one B 3, three C 1 and two C 2). Results All the cases were followed up for 4-12 months (average seven months). Bone union achieved in all cases except for one death. According to Aro, in the LCP group, three cases were excellent, 14 good, one fair and one poor and in the traditional treatment group, two cases were excellent, 11 good, six fair and two poor. There was statistically significant difference in regard of functional recovery of radial height and forearm rotation (P<0.05). Conclusion Open reduction and internal fixation with LCP is better than traditional minapulis osteosynthesis in treatment of unstable distal radial fractures.