外侧斜形和L形切口治疗跟骨骨折的应用对比

目的比较外侧斜形和L形切口治疗跟骨骨折的临床疗效。方法对27例（32足）跟骨骨折分别采用L形切口组15例（18足）、斜形切口组12例（14足）进行手术治疗。结果患者均获随访,时间9～16（10.6±1.7）个月。L形切口组与斜形切口组甲级愈合分别为14足和12足,乙级愈合分别为3足和2足,丙级愈合分别为1足和0足。斜形切口组在切口并发症发生率、切口愈合时间、骨折愈合时间和末次随访AOFAS评分方面略优于L形切口组,但差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。结论斜形切口亦可作为外侧入路治疗跟骨骨折良好选择。

Oblique lateral incision versus L-shaped lateral incision for the calcaneal fracture treatment

Objective To evaluate the outcomes after treatment of calcaneal fracture with oblique lateral incision and L-shaped lateral incision.Methods Twenty-seven patients with 32 fractured calcanei operatively treated with two incisions were evaluated.15 patients with 18 fractures were treated with the L-shaped lateral incision.In the other group,12 patients with 14 fractures were treated with an oblique lateral incision.Results Evaluation was made after an average 9～16（10.6±1.7） months follow-up.The incisions healed with A grade in 14 and 12 feet with L and oblique incision,respectively,and B grade in 3 and 2,and C grade in 1 and 0.As regard to the incidence of incision complication,incision healing time,fracture healing time and AOFAS at the time of the last follow-up,the oblique incision group was better than the L-shaped incision group.However,there was no statistical difference（P〉0.05）.Conclusions The oblique lateral incision can be considered as a good alternative of lateral approach for calcaneal fracture treatment.