PFN - A 治疗股骨近端骨折临床分析

目的 对比分析动力髋螺钉（DHS）和股骨近端防旋髓内钉（PFN-A）临床用于治疗股骨近端骨折的疗效.方法 采用回顾性分析法将160例股骨近端骨折患者分为两组,一组予以DHS治疗,另一组予以PFN-A治疗,比较两组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、切口长度、骨折愈合时间和髋关节功能恢复效果等情况.结果 组间治疗后PFN-A组的手术时间、术中出血量、切口长度和骨折愈合时间明显优于DHS组（P＜0.05）;治疗后PFN-A组的髋关节功能恢复效果明显优于DHS组（P＜0.05）.结论 PFN-A治疗股骨近端骨折手术时间短、术中出血量少、切口长度短、骨折愈合时间短,且术后髋关节功能恢复良好,值得在临床推广应用.

Clinical Analysis of PFN-A Treatment on Proximal Femoral Fracture

Objective To comparatively analyze their curative effects of dynamic hip screw （DHS） and proximal femoral interlocking nail （ PFN - A） of proximal femoral fractures treatment. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed to 160 patients of proximal femo- ral fracture. DHS was applied to one group and PFN - A to another group. Then the operation time, the blood loss, the incision length, the fracture healing time and the hip functional recovery effect were compared. Results The operation time,the blood loss,the incision length, the fracture healing time and the hip functional recovery effect of the PFN - A group were much better than the DHS group （ P 〈 O. 05 ）. Conclusion The PFN - A for treating proximal femoral fractures has a shorter operation time, less blood loss, shorter fracture healing time and better hip functional recovery effect, so it is worth clinical promotion.