本文選題：股骨粗隆間骨折　切入點(diǎn)：股骨近端防旋髓內(nèi)釘　出處：《浙江中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：目的比較股骨近端防旋髓內(nèi)釘(PFNA)與股骨近端鎖定鋼板(LPFP)治療老年股骨粗隆間骨折的臨床療效。方法回顧性分析自2013-01—2015-11鎮(zhèn)海區(qū)人民醫(yī)院、富陽(yáng)市中醫(yī)骨傷科醫(yī)院、紹興市中醫(yī)院診治的106例股骨粗隆間骨折患者,選取相同年齡段、骨折分型、ASA分級(jí)、手術(shù)時(shí)機(jī)的股骨粗隆間骨折患者分為A、B兩組,A組54例采用股骨近端防旋髓內(nèi)釘內(nèi)固定治療,B組52例采用解剖型鎖定鋼板治療,并且兩組均采用損傷三期辯證施治,對(duì)兩組手術(shù)時(shí)間、手術(shù)出血量、術(shù)后下地時(shí)間、術(shù)后髖關(guān)節(jié)功能Harris評(píng)分優(yōu)良率、并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率、骨折愈合時(shí)間及住院天數(shù)等進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)比較。結(jié)果兩組術(shù)后均可獲得較好的療效,A組較B組在手術(shù)時(shí)間、術(shù)后下地時(shí)間、住院天數(shù)方面均明顯縮短,手術(shù)出血量顯著減少,術(shù)后15個(gè)月髖關(guān)節(jié)功能Harris評(píng)分優(yōu)良率A組要優(yōu)于B組,差異有明顯統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05);但兩組在骨折愈合時(shí)間、術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率等方面無(wú)明顯統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05))。結(jié)論P(yáng)FNA與鎖定鋼板治療股骨粗隆間骨折均可獲得較好的療效,但PFNA較鎖定鋼板手術(shù)創(chuàng)傷相對(duì)更小,功能恢復(fù)更快,在臨床治療上存在一定的優(yōu)勢(shì)性。
[Abstract]:Objective to compare the clinical effects of proximal femoral intramedullary nail (PFNA) and proximal femoral locking plate (LPFPFP) in the treatment of femoral intertrochanteric fractures in the elderly. Methods retrospective analysis was made from the people's Hospital of Zhenhai District, Fuyang City, from 2013-01-2015-11, Fuyang Hospital of Orthopedics and Trauma of traditional Chinese Medicine. 106 patients with intertrochanteric fracture of femur were treated in Shaoxing Chinese Medicine Hospital. The patients with intertrochanteric fracture of femur were divided into two groups: group A (n = 54) and group B (n = 52) treated with anatomic locking plate, and group A (n = 54) were treated with anatomic locking plate. The time of operation, the amount of blood loss, the time of landing, the excellent and good rate of Harris score of hip joint function, the incidence of complications were analyzed in the two groups. Results the curative effect of group A was significantly shorter than that of group B in terms of operation time, postoperative landing time and hospital stay, and the amount of operative bleeding was significantly decreased. 15 months after operation, the excellent and good rate of Harris score of hip joint function in group A was better than that in group B, and the difference was statistically significant (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications (P 0.05). Conclusion both PFNA and locking plate are effective in the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture of femur, but PFNA has less trauma and faster recovery of function than that of locking plate in the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture of femur. There are some advantages in clinical treatment.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：R687.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 雷寧波;張?zhí)焯?魏國(guó)俊;王志勇;;有限切開復(fù)位股骨近端抗旋髓內(nèi)釘治療股骨轉(zhuǎn)子下骨折[J];臨床骨科雜志;2016年04期

2 回丙盼;關(guān)鵬飛;陳杰;王大璐;張宏斌;張駿;邢武;劉英;;鎖定鋼板聯(lián)合重建鋼板內(nèi)固定治療不穩(wěn)定股骨粗隆間骨折[J];中國(guó)骨與關(guān)節(jié)損傷雜志;2016年06期

3 楊康;劉思華;肖四旺;;PFN內(nèi)固定結(jié)合中藥治療老年性股骨粗隆間骨折18例小結(jié)[J];湖南中醫(yī)雜志;2016年03期

4 王弘;余楨;朱彬;王光華;許譚妙;;股骨近端防旋髓內(nèi)針治療高齡不穩(wěn)定性股骨轉(zhuǎn)子間骨折[J];臨床骨科雜志;2016年01期

5 何振東;王文己;朱成善;張進(jìn)元;周志軍;;防旋髓內(nèi)釘與動(dòng)力髖螺釘治療股骨轉(zhuǎn)子間骨折療效比較[J];臨床骨科雜志;2016年01期

6 徐風(fēng)瑞;何明武;姚忠軍;喬亮;;PFNA內(nèi)固定與人工股骨頭置換術(shù)治療高齡骨質(zhì)疏松性股骨粗隆間骨折的比較[J];中國(guó)骨與關(guān)節(jié)損傷雜志;2016年02期

7 曾晶山;蔡賢華;李穩(wěn);王慶;孔長(zhǎng)旺;王鋒;;隱性失血量對(duì)老年股骨轉(zhuǎn)子間骨折術(shù)后臨床療效影響的分析[J];中國(guó)矯形外科雜志;2016年02期

8 柴瑞寶;;PFNA與解剖型鎖定鋼板治療老年人股骨粗隆間骨折的臨床比較研究[J];中國(guó)矯形外科雜志;2015年16期

9 杜勇;舒建國(guó);龔革會(huì);;中西醫(yī)結(jié)合治療老年不穩(wěn)定型股骨粗隆間骨折的療效觀察[J];山東中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2015年04期

10 王寶鵬;李光磊;張冰;孫全省;;兩種方法治療高齡股骨粗隆間骨折療效比較[J];中國(guó)矯形外科雜志;2015年08期

，

本文編號(hào)：1667828