【摘要】：[目的]對比分析Cable Pin系統(tǒng)環(huán)扎固定與記憶合金聚髕器固定兩種方法治療老年髕骨粉碎骨折的技術(shù)及療效。[方法]選取本科2010年8月~2014年4月收治的40例閉合性粉碎性髕骨骨折(Rockwood 5型)老年患者,隨機分成環(huán)扎組和鎳鈦聚髕器組,每組20例,分別采用Cable Pin系統(tǒng)環(huán)扎固定與記憶合金聚髕器固定。觀察并對比兩組的治療效果。[結(jié)果]40例患者,切口均甲級愈合,無感染發(fā)生,骨折全部愈合。除2例下肢靜脈血栓外無其他并發(fā)癥發(fā)生。以Bostman髕骨骨折療效評分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行評分:總體優(yōu)良率88%。手術(shù)時間環(huán)扎組長于聚髕器組,在關(guān)節(jié)屈曲角度、骨折愈合時間、Bostman髕骨骨折療效評分方面環(huán)扎組優(yōu)于聚髕器組,差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。[結(jié)論]Cable Pin系統(tǒng)環(huán)扎固定與記憶合金聚髕器固定兩種手術(shù)方法,在出血量、術(shù)后并發(fā)癥方面無明顯差別,在手術(shù)時間方面記憶合金聚髕器固定優(yōu)于Cable Pin系統(tǒng)環(huán)扎固定,而在膝關(guān)節(jié)屈曲角度、骨折愈合時間、Bostman髕骨骨折療效評分方面環(huán)扎固定優(yōu)于聚髕器固定。
[Abstract]:[objective] to compare and analyze the technique and effect of Cable Pin system ring fixation and memory alloy patellar concentrator fixation in the treatment of senile patellar comminuted fracture. [methods] A total of 40 elderly patients with closed comminuted patellar fracture (Rockwood type 5) were randomly divided into ring ligation group and nickel titanium patellar aggregator group (20 cases in each group). Cable Pin system and memory alloy patellar fixator were used respectively. The therapeutic effect of the two groups was observed and compared. [results] in 40 patients, all the incisions healed in grade A, no infection occurred, and all the fractures healed. There were no complications except 2 cases of venous thrombosis of lower extremity. The total excellent and good rate was 88% according to Bostman patellar fracture score. The operative time of ring ligation group was better than that of the group of patellar aggregator group in terms of joint flexion angle and fracture healing time and the score of curative effect of Bostman patellar fracture was better than that of the group of patellar concentrator, the difference was statistically significant. [conclusion] there is no significant difference in blood loss and postoperative complications between Cable Pin system and memory alloy patellar fixator. The fixation time of memory alloy patellar concentrator is better than that of Cable Pin system. In knee flexion angle, fracture healing time and Bostman patellar fracture score, ring fixation was better than patellar fixator.
【作者單位】： 首都醫(yī)科大學(xué)附屬北京康復(fù)醫(yī)院骨科;
【分類號】：R687.3

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 胡彥,張圣魁;不銹鋼絲環(huán)扎影響骨折愈合的原因分析[J];中醫(yī)正骨;2003年03期

2 莫艷秋,張樺,陳玲;環(huán)扎加壓治療孔源性視網(wǎng)膜脫離[J];河南診斷與治療雜志;1997年01期

3 陳振東;陳洪祥;;腭咽環(huán)扎法修復(fù)腭裂異物排斥反應(yīng)4例報告[J];現(xiàn)代口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;1989年01期

4 李英豪;;環(huán)扎法治療多指(趾)畸形3例[J];醫(yī)學(xué)理論與實踐;1991年02期

5 邢繼平,劉成,武秀平,陳向軍,李志偉;環(huán)扎式肌腱縫接法臨床應(yīng)用37例[J];人民軍醫(yī);1996年04期

6 彭億平;李鳳;周明;;新生兒軟組織環(huán)扎意外傷原因分析及防范對策[J];全科護(hù)理;2014年24期

7 張淑娟,郭曉松;應(yīng)用環(huán)扎加壓手術(shù)治愈后緣翻轉(zhuǎn)巨大裂孔視網(wǎng)膜脫離1例[J];中國實用眼科雜志;1997年05期

8 張相月;于海雁;;環(huán)扎法吻合肌腱37例臨床觀察[J];中國社區(qū)醫(yī)師(綜合版);2006年01期

9 李德珍,張文科;鋼絲雙圈環(huán)扎法治療髕骨粉碎骨折[J];現(xiàn)代中西醫(yī)結(jié)合雜志;2002年03期

10 李惠利;宋海峰;;包皮環(huán)扎手術(shù)患者的心理干預(yù)[J];基層醫(yī)學(xué)論壇;2013年06期

，

本文編號：2198308