髓内钉治疗胫腓骨骨折适应范围及疗效探讨

目的]探讨带锁髓内钉、髓内扩张自锁髓内钉的适应范围。了解上述固定物的特点以提高疗效。方法]回顾性分析了自2000年6月～2003年9月应用带锁髓内钉、髓内扩张自锁髓内钉治疗116例胫腓骨骨折病人，其中男83例，女33例，年龄16～74岁，平均38岁。带锁髓内钉固定者60例；自锁髓内钉固定者56例。随访时间12～24个月，平均17．9个月，对于上述2种手术方法列表进行了比较。结果]在带锁钉组优良率、愈合率、闭合复位率、扩髓率、并发症、抗旋转能力分别为89．5％、96．7％、71．6％、51．6％、21．6％和＋＋＋。髓内扩张自锁髓内钉组对应相关数据分别是91．5％，98．2％，89．3％，5．3％，3．5％和＋。结论]带锁髓内钉是治疗胫骨骨折比较理想的内固定材料。自锁钉的手术适应症基本上同带锁钉。但自锁钉弹性固定，保持微动状态，有利于骨折早期愈合，手术更易达到微创水平。胫骨中段或中下1／3横断、斜行骨折尽量选用自锁钉。带锁钉则适宜粉碎、多段骨折。本文带锁钉扩髓与自锁钉不扩髓术式比较，两者愈合方面未显出不同。胫腓骨骨折髓内钉固定一般不必要扩髓。

Effect on fibula-tibia fracture treatment by two different intramedullary nails

Objective]To evaluate and compare the effects of fibial-tibial fracture(FTF) treated by interlocking intramedullary nail (I I N group A) and intramedullary expand expanded self-lock nail (IESN group B).Method]From June 2000 to September 2003,one hundred sixteen cases of FTF were treated by I I N(N=60)or IESN (N=56) and followed-up for 12~24 months (average 17.9 months).Results were compared between group A and group B.Result]In group A,the satisfactory rate,union rate,close reduction rate,medullary expanding rate,complication rate and antirotation ability were 89.5%, 96.7%, 71.6%, 51.6%,21.6% and +++ respectively.In group B,that were correspondently 91.0%,98.5%,89.3%,5.3%,3% and +.Conclusion]Adopting the biological osteosynthesis either the I I N or IESN for treatment of FTF could get a result of more satisfactory rate and higer union rate.Applying a stable fixation,the IESN is more suitable for instable FTF.Such as multisegmental or comminuted targe oblique FTF,while of fering a flexible fixation,IESN is preferable for transverse fractures of middle and lower third tibia and fibula.