首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     

四种内固定方法治疗老年股骨转子间骨折的对比研究
引用本文:胡阿威,喻爱喜,夏成焱,吴刚. 四种内固定方法治疗老年股骨转子间骨折的对比研究[J]. 中华全科医师杂志, 2013, 12(3): 185-188
作者姓名:胡阿威  喻爱喜  夏成焱  吴刚
作者单位:胡阿威 (430071,武汉大学中南医院骨科); 喻爱喜 (430071,武汉大学中南医院骨科);夏成焱 (430071,武汉大学中南医院骨科); 吴刚 (430071,武汉大学中南医院骨科);
摘    要:目的比较动力髋螺钉(DHS)、股骨近端解剖型锁定钢板(LPFP)、Gamma钉、股骨近端抗旋髓内钉(PFNA)治疗老年股骨转子间骨折的疗效。方法回顾分析2006年6月至2011年9月收治的164例老年股骨转子间骨折患者的临床资料。164例分别采用DHS(42例)、LPFP(40例)、Gamma钉(36例)、PFNA(46例)内固定治疗,对4组的手术时间、术中出血量、骨折临床愈合时间、术后并发症及术后6个月Harris髋关节功能评分进行比较。结果术后随访6~36个月。DHS、LPFP、Gamma钉、PFNA组的手术时间分别为(103±15)、(90±13)、(79±11)和(65±9)min,术中出血量分别为(202±23)、(181±23)、(98±13)和(87±11)ml,骨折临床愈合时间分别为(16.1±1.9)、(14.6±1.8)、(12.9±1.7)和(11.5±1.4)周,差异均有统计学意义(F值分别为2.87、3.21、2.66,均P〈0.05);术后发生并发症比例分别为4/42、3/40、2/36和1/46,术后6个月Harris髋关节功能评分优良率分别为81%(34/42)、85%(34/40)、89%(32/36)和93%(43/46),差异均有统计学意义(X^2=5.67,H=20.03,均P〈0.05)。结论治疗老年股骨转子间骨折应根据患者全身情况及骨折分型选择不同的内固定方法,髓内固定(Gamma钉、PFNA)优于髓外固定(DHS、LPFP);PFNA疗效优于其他3组,是优先的治疗选择。

关 键 词:股骨骨折  转子间  骨折固定术    内固定器  对比研究

Comparison of four methods of fixation for intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients
HU A- wei,YU Ai-xi,XIA Cheng-yan,WU Gang. Comparison of four methods of fixation for intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients[J]. Chinese JOurnal of General Practitioners, 2013, 12(3): 185-188
Authors:HU A- wei  YU Ai-xi  XIA Cheng-yan  WU Gang
Affiliation:( Department of Orthopedics, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan 430071, China)
Abstract:Objective To compare the internal fixation methods for treatment of intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients. Methods One hundred and sixty four elderly patients with intertrochanteric fractures were treated from June 2006 to September 2011. The fractures were fixed with dynamic hip screws ( DHS, n = 42 ), locking proximal femur plate ( LPFP, n = 40) , Gamma nails ( n = 36 ) or proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA, n = 46 ) , respectively. The clinical data were collected and the operative time, blood loss, time of clinical healing, postoperative complications and Harris hip scores of 6 months after surgery were compared among groups. Results All patients were followed-up for 6 to 36 months. The operative times of DHS, LPFP, Gamma nails and PFNA groups were ( 103 ± 15 ) , (90 ± 13 ) , (79 ± 11 ) and (65 ± 9 ) min, respectively ( F = 2. 87, P 〈 0. 05 ). The blood loss of 4 groups was ( 202 ± 23 ) , ( 181 ± 23 ) , ( 98 ± 13 ) and ( 87 ± 11 ) ml, respectively ( F = 3.21, P 〈 0. 05 ). The times of clinical fracture healing were (16.1±1.9), (14.6±1.8), (12.9±1.7) and (11.5±1.4) weeks, respeetively(F=2.66,P〈 0. 05). The postoperative complications of 4 groups were 4/42, 3/40, 2/36 and 1/46, respectively(x^2 = 5.67 ,P 〈0. 05). The Harris hip scores of 6 months after surgery of 4 groups were 81% (34/42) , 85% (34/ 40), 89% (32/36) and 93% (43/46), respectively(H =20. 03 ,P 〈0. 05). Conclusions In treatment for intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients, the efficacy of intramedullary fixation (Gamma nails and PFNA) is better than extramedullary fixation ( DHS and LPFP). PFNA is more effective than other 3 methods and should be preferentially chosen.
Keywords:Femoral fractures, intertroehanteric  Fracture fixation, internal  Internal fixators  Comparative study
本文献已被 维普 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号