空心钉锁定钢板与加压空心螺钉治疗青壮年股骨颈骨折对比研究

石兴雷; 阮传江; 韩玉虎; 张杰; 徐磊; 邹彬; 丁祥; 范虎

doi:10.13898/j.cnki.issn.1000-2200.2019.07.014

空心钉锁定钢板与加压空心螺钉治疗青壮年股骨颈骨折对比研究

Comparative study on the treatment of femoral neck fracture in young adults with hollow nail locking plate and pressurized hollow screw

摘要

摘要:
目的比较空心钉锁定钢板和加压空心螺钉治疗股骨颈骨折临床效果。
方法选择64例股骨颈骨折病人，随机分为空心钉锁定钢板组（甲组）与空心螺钉组（乙组），按照Garden标准分类，记录受伤至手术时间、手术时间、出血量、住院时间、骨折愈合时间、并发症情况，并进行统计学分析。
结果2组性别、年龄、受伤至手术时间、住院时间、切开复位、手术时间、骨折愈合时间比较差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。甲组病人手术出血量、术后12个月Harris评分均明显高于乙组（P < 0.01）。甲组术后松动、切出、退钉及总并发症发生率均低于乙组（P < 0.05和P < 0.01）。
结论在股骨颈骨折手术治疗中，相对于加压空心螺钉，股骨近端空心钉锁定钢板具有术后并发症低、髋关节功能恢复较好优点。

Abstract:
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical effects between hollow nail locking plate and pressurized hollow screw in the treatment of femoral neck fracture.
MethodsSixty-four patients with femoral neck fractures were randomly divided into the hollow nail locking plate group(group A) and pressurized hollow screw group(group B).According to the classification of Garden standard, the time from injury to operation, operation time, blood loss, hospital stay, fracture healing time and complications in two groups were recorded and analyzed.
ResultsThe differences of the gender, age, time from injury to operation, hospital stay, open reduction time, operation time and fracture healing time between two groups were not statistically significant(P>0.05).The peroperative bleeding and postoperative Harris score in group A were significantly higher than those in group B(P < 0.01).The incidence rates of postoperative loosening, removal, nail removal and total complications in group A were significantly lower than those in group B(P < 0.05 and P < 0.01).
ConclusionsDuring the surgical treatment of femoral neck fracture, compared with the pressurized hollow screw, the hollow nail locking plate of proximal femoral has the advantages of low postoperative complications and good recovery of hip function.

HTML全文

参考文献(17)

施引文献

资源附件(0)