锁定加压钢板及解剖钢板治疗高能量胫骨远端骨折的对比研究

目的 对比锁定加压钢板(1ocking compression plate,LCP)及普通解剖钢板治疗高能量胫骨远端骨折的临床疗效.方法 2003年5月-2009年5月,采用LCP及解剖钢板治疗入选的高能量胫骨远端骨折42例.解剖钢板组24例,男16例,女8例;年龄20～54岁,平均39岁.按AO分型:A型13例,B型5例,C型6例.LCP组18例,男15例,女3例;年龄25～55岁,平均40岁.按AO分型:A型11例,B型3例,C型4例.比较两组的手术时间、出血量、透视次数、骨折愈合时间、踝关节功能及并发症,参照Mazur标准评价踝关节功能.结果 LCP组平均随访11.6个月,解剖钢板组平均随访14.2个月,均显示骨折愈合.解剖钢板组植骨比例多于LCP组.CP组透视次数L多于解剖钢板组.LCP组手术时间、手术切口、出血量、放射学愈合时间及术后并发症发生总数优于解剖钢板组.结论 LCP及解剖钢板治疗高能量胫骨远端骨折均可取得满意效果,但LCP具有创伤小、骨折愈合快、并发症少等优点,体现了生物学固定的优点,是治疗高能量胫骨远端骨折的有效方法.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the clinic effect of the locking compression plate (LCP) fixation and the anatomical plate in treatment of high-energy distal tibial fractures. Methods The study involved 42 patients with high-energy distal tibial fractures treated between May 2003 and May 2009. The anatomical plate group included 24 patients ( 16 males and 8 females, at average age of 39 years), of whom there were 13 patients with type A fractures, five with type B and six with type C according to the AO/ASIF classification. The LCP group included 18 patients ( 15 males and 3 females, at average age of 40 years), of whom there were 11 patients with type A fractures, three with type B and four with type C according to the AO/ASIF classification. All the patients were followed up for 8-17 months. Their functional and radiographic outcomes were collected. The operation time, intra-operative blood loss, X-ray exposure, bone healing time, post-operative complications and therapeutic effects were compared between both groups. Mazur's criteria was used to evaluate the function of the ankle. Results The LCP group was followed up for average 11.6 months and the anatomical plate group for average 14.2 months, which showed fracture healing in all the patients. The bone graft in the anatomical plate group was used more frequently than the LCP group, while the X-ray exposure in the LCP group was much more than that in the anatomical plate group. The operation time, incision size, blood loss, postoperative complications and radiographic bone healing time in the LCP group were significantly less than those in the anatomical plate group. Conclusions Both the LCP and anatomical plate are effective methods for the high energy distal tibial fractures. LCP has advantages of less trauma, quick fracture healing and less complications, is consistent with the biomechanics of internal fixation and hence is an ideal method for the treatment of the high-energy tibial fractures.

Comparative study on curative effect of locking compression plate fixation and anatomical plate in treatment of high-energy distal tibial fractures

Objective To compare the clinic effect of the locking compression plate (LCP) fixation and the anatomical plate in treatment of high-energy distal tibial fractures. Methods The study involved 42 patients with high-energy distal tibial fractures treated between May 2003 and May 2009. The anatomical plate group included 24 patients ( 16 males and 8 females, at average age of 39 years), of whom there were 13 patients with type A fractures, five with type B and six with type C according to the AO/ASIF classification. The LCP group included 18 patients ( 15 males and 3 females, at average age of 40 years), of whom there were 11 patients with type A fractures, three with type B and four with type C according to the AO/ASIF classification. All the patients were followed up for 8-17 months. Their functional and radiographic outcomes were collected. The operation time, intra-operative blood loss, X-ray exposure, bone healing time, post-operative complications and therapeutic effects were compared between both groups. Mazur's criteria was used to evaluate the function of the ankle. Results The LCP group was followed up for average 11.6 months and the anatomical plate group for average 14.2 months, which showed fracture healing in all the patients. The bone graft in the anatomical plate group was used more frequently than the LCP group, while the X-ray exposure in the LCP group was much more than that in the anatomical plate group. The operation time, incision size, blood loss, postoperative complications and radiographic bone healing time in the LCP group were significantly less than those in the anatomical plate group. Conclusions Both the LCP and anatomical plate are effective methods for the high energy distal tibial fractures. LCP has advantages of less trauma, quick fracture healing and less complications, is consistent with the biomechanics of internal fixation and hence is an ideal method for the treatment of the high-energy tibial fractures.