交锁髓内钉与加压钢板内固定治疗股骨干粉碎性骨折的疗效对比

目的比较交锁髓内钉与加压钢板内固定治疗股骨干粉碎性骨折的临床疗效。方法选取2015年1月至2018年1月期间我院收治的80例股骨干粉碎性骨折患者,按手术方式的不同分成髓内钉组和钢板组各40例。髓内钉组采取交锁髓内钉内固定术治疗,钢板组采取加压钢板内固定术治疗,比较两组的术后膝关节功能恢复情况及骨折愈合时间。结果髓内钉组患者的术后膝关节功能恢复优良率为92.50%,显著高于钢板组的72.50%,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。髓内钉组的平均骨折愈合时间为(121.89±7.64) d,显著短于钢板组的(155.26±9.67) d,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论交锁髓内钉内固定治疗股骨干粉碎性骨折的临床疗效优于加压钢板内固定,其在膝关节功能恢复、术后骨折愈合速度方面优势明显。

Comparison on the Efficacy of Internal Fixation with Interlocking Intramedullary Nail Versus Compression Plate in the Treatment of Comminuted Fracture of Femoral Shaft

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of internal fixation with interlocking intramedullary nail versus compression plate in the treatment of comminuted fracture of femoral shaft.Methods A total of 80 patients with comminuted fracture of femoral shaft admitted to our hospital from January 2015 to January 2018 were selected and divided into intramedullary nail group and plate group according to different surgical methods, with 40 cases in each group. The intramedullary nail group was treated with interlocking intramedullary nail internal fixation, and the plate group was treated with compression plate internal fixation. The postoperative knee joint function recovery and fracture healing time were compared between the two groups.Results The excellent and good rate of postoperative knee joint function recovery of intramedullary nail group was 92.50%, significantly higher than 72.50% of plate group, with statistically significant difference(P<0.05). The average fracture healing time of intramedullary nail group was(121.89±7.64) d, significantly shorter than(155.26±9.67) d of plate group, with statistically significant difference(P<0.05). Conclusions Interlocking intramedullary nail internal fixation has better clinical efficacy than compression plate internal fixation in the treatment of comminuted fracture of femoral shaft,which has advantages in knee joint function recovery and postoperative fracture healing speed.