可膨胀髓内钉和交锁髓内钉在胫骨干骨折治疗中的比较

目的 对可膨胀髓内钉和交锁髓内钉在胫骨骨折治疗中的相关因素进行比较分析。方法 2004年6月至2005年10月间，收治胫骨干骨折57例，42例行交锁髓内钉固定，15例行可膨胀髓内钉固定。对两组病例的手术时间、术中出血量、术中透视时间、术后并发症、骨折愈合时间进行比较。结果 两组在手术时间、术中出血量、术中透视时间、骨折愈合时间等方面差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05），在术后并发症上无显著性差异（P〉0．05）。因此可膨胀髓内钉组在多方面均优于交锁髓内钉组。结论 可膨胀髓内钉具有操作方便、创伤小、愈合快等优点，但费用昂贵，适应症较窄。

The comparison between expandable intramedullary nails and interlocking intramedullary nails in treatment of tibial shaft fracture

Objective To compare and analyse the related factors in the treatment of tibial shaft fracture with expandable intramedullary and interlocking intramedullary nailing systems. Methods From June 2004 to October 2005,57cases with tibial shaft fractures were followed up.They were treated with two kinds of fixations: interlocking intramedullary nail(42cases) and expandable intramedullary nail(15cases).The data of each group were collected for comparison on the following aspects:operative time,blood loss,fluoroscopy exposures,post-operative complications and healing time of fracture. Results The differences of the operative time,blood loss,fluoroscopy exposures and healing time of fracture between two groups were of statistical significance (P<0.05). The differences in the post-operative complications between two groups were of no statistical significance (P>0.05).The group of expandable intramedullary nail was more satisfactory than the group of interlocking intramedullary nail on many aspects. Conclusion The expandable intramedullary nailing systems have many advantages over intramedullary nailing systems,such as easy operation,less trauma and soon healing.but they are more costly and less indication.