不同内固定方法对股骨骨折的疗效分析

目的对比分析动力髋螺钉和股骨近端螺旋刀片抗旋髓内钉治疗股骨骨折的疗效。方法回顾性对比分析笔者所在医院2009年2月～2011年12月接诊治疗的72例股骨骨折患者,随机分为DHS组34例和PFNA组38例,比较两组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、术后骨折愈合时间和术后髋关节功能Harris评分。结果 PFNA组的手术时间、术中出血量、术后骨折愈合时间分别为(63.0±13.0)min、(158.0±38.0)mL、(12.0±1.0)周;DHS组的手术时间、术中出血量、术后骨折愈合时间分别为(118.0±14.0)min、(270.0±43.0)mL、(15.0±0.5)周;术后髋关节功能Harris评分DHS组为88.24%,而PFNA组为97.37%。结论 PFNA内固定法具有操作简单、手术时间短、创伤小、术中出血量少、愈合快等优点,较DHS内固定是一种更理想的治疗股骨骨折的方法。

Analysis of the efficacy of different internal fixations of hip fracture

Objective To compare the analysis of Dynamic Hip Screw and Proximal Femoral Nail Anti-rotation treatment of femoral fractures. Methods Retrospectively analyzed the clinical data from February 2009 to December 2011 of our hospital. 72 cases of femur fracture patients were randomly divided into the DHS group (34 cases) and PFNA (38 cases). To compare the two groups of patients with surgerytime,blood loss,postoperative fracture healing time and postoperative hip Harris score. Results Surgery time,blood loss and postoperative fracture healing time of PFNA groups were (63.0±13.0) min,(158.0±38.0) mL and(12.0±1.0) weeks. DHS group,operative time,blood loss,postoperative fracture healing time,respectively (118.0±14.0) min,(270.0±43.0) mL and (15.0±0.5) weeks. Postoperative hip jointHarris score DHS group was 88.24%,PFNA group was 97.37%. Conclusion PFNA fixation is simple,surgical time,less trauma,less blood loss,healing faster,et al. So it's an ideal treatment of femur fractures compared with DHS fixation.