开放性胫腓骨骨折两种治疗方法疗效的比较

目的 比较外固定支架、延期交锁髓内钉两种固定方法治疗开放性胫腓骨骨折的疗效.方法 对86例开放性胫腓骨骨折患者采用不同治疗方法,36例采用单侧外固定支架治疗(外固定支架组),50例采用延期交锁髓内钉固定治疗(延期交锁髓内钉组).按吴岳嵩和徐伯诚制定标准结合Johner-Wruh评分评定标准对两组疗效进行比较.结果 所有患者随访6～24个月,平均(16.0±2.4)个月.外固定支架组优良率80.6%(29/36),延期交锁髓内钉组优良率88.0%(44/50),两组优良率比较差异无统计学意义(Z=-1.103,P＞0.05).结论 对开放性胫腓骨骨折患者而言,延期应用交锁髓内钉固定可被认为是一种有效的方法,同外固定支架一起,作为重要的治疗选择.

Comparison of therapeutic effects on compound tibial and fibular fractures with two different methods

Objective To compare the healing effect of compound tibial and fibular fractures with two different fixation methods of external fixators (EF) and interlocking intramedullary nail ( INF). Methods Eighty-six cases of compound tibial and fibular fractures received different treatment, 36 cases in EF group and 50 cases in INF group. The difference between two groups was statistically analyzed according to WU Yue-song and XU Bo-cheng standard and Johner-Wruh score. Results All cases were followedup for 6-24 months,average (16.0 ± 2.4) months. The excellent and good rate were 80.6% (29/36) in EF group and 88.0%(44/50) in INF group respectively. There was no significant difference between two groups (Z =-1.103,P ＞0.05). Conclusions To the compound tibial and fibular fractures patients,INF can be considered as an effective method. It's an important therapy choice with EF to heal the compound tibial and fibular fractures.