PFNA与DHS治疗股骨粗隆间骨折疗效对比研究

目的探讨股骨粗隆间骨折（IFF）患者采用股骨近端防旋髓内钉（PFNA）与动力髋螺钉（DHS）两种治疗方法的临床疗效。方法将102例IFF患者随机分为PFNA组和DHS组，各51例。PFNA组采用PFNA治疗，DHS组采用DHS治疗，比较两组手术情况及并发症发生率。结果与DHS组比较，PFNA组x线暴露次数较多，术中出血量较少，术后下床时间、住院天数及骨折愈合时间较短，切口长度较短（均为P〈0．01）；两组手术时间和Harris法髋关节功能评分比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。两组并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）；PFNA组肢体缩短情况优于DHS组（P〈0．01）。结论PFNA治疗IFF具有明显优势，其手术操作简单，术中出血少，术后恢复快，是一种安全有效的治疗方法，值得临床推广应用。

Clinical effects study of PFNA and DHS in the treatment of intertrochanteric femur fractures

Objective To explore the clinical effects of the two treatment methods with PFNA and DHS in the treatment of in- tertrochanteric femur fractures （IFF）. Methods One hundred and two cases with IFF, according to the methods of treatment, were e- venly divided into PFNA group in which the patients received PFNA treatment and DHS group in which the patients received DHS treat- ment. The operations and complications of the patients in both groups were compared. Results Compared with the PFNA group, the patients in the DHS group received more of exposure the X-ray; ha~d less blood loss, shorther postoperative ambulation time, hospitaliza- tion days, fractures healing time and cut. There was no statistical differences in the operation time, Harris coxa joint function scores and complication incidence （ P 〉 0.05 ）. There was no statistical significance in complication incidence rate （ P 〉 0.05 ）. The limps short- ening of the patients in the PFNA group was better than that of the patients in the DHS group （ P 〈 0.01 ）. Conclusion PFNA treat- ment which has obvious advantages of simple operation,less operative blood loss and fewer complications is a safe and effective treat- ment and is worthy of clinical application.