發(fā)布時(shí)間：2019-04-28 18:43

【摘要】：目的：對(duì)比經(jīng)皮骶髂螺釘與經(jīng)皮重建鋼板兩種內(nèi)固定方法修復(fù)TileC型骶骨骨折的效果差異。方法：回顧性分析63例單側(cè)TileC型骶骨骨折患者的臨床資料,其中26例行經(jīng)皮骶髂螺釘內(nèi)固定,37例行經(jīng)皮重建鋼板內(nèi)固定。比較兩組患者手術(shù)時(shí)間、術(shù)中出血量、切口總長度、X射線暴露次數(shù)、骨折愈合時(shí)間等方面的差異,并依據(jù)Matta標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和Majeed標(biāo)準(zhǔn)評(píng)價(jià)臨床療效。結(jié)果：63例患者均獲得隨訪12-36個(gè)月。所有患者均未出現(xiàn)醫(yī)源性神經(jīng)血管損傷、切口感染、內(nèi)固定松動(dòng)或斷裂、骨折不愈合及雙下肢不等長等并發(fā)癥。兩組患者在手術(shù)時(shí)間、術(shù)中出血量、切口總長度、X線暴露次數(shù)、Matta標(biāo)準(zhǔn)評(píng)價(jià)和Majeed標(biāo)準(zhǔn)評(píng)價(jià)方面的差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,在骨折愈合時(shí)間方面的差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。結(jié)論：經(jīng)皮骶髂螺釘內(nèi)固定術(shù)在術(shù)中出血量、切口總長度及臨床療效方面優(yōu)于經(jīng)皮重建鋼板內(nèi)固定術(shù),但手術(shù)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)更大,對(duì)技術(shù)要求更高,適合有經(jīng)驗(yàn)的治療小組應(yīng)用；經(jīng)皮重建鋼板內(nèi)固定術(shù)在臨床療效方面雖稍不如經(jīng)皮骶髂螺釘內(nèi)固定術(shù),但在手術(shù)時(shí)間、X線暴露次數(shù)方面更優(yōu),且操作相對(duì)簡單,便于基層醫(yī)院推廣。
[Abstract]:Objective: to compare the effect of percutaneous sacroiliac screw and percutaneous reconstruction plate in the repair of TileC sacral fracture. Methods: the clinical data of 63 cases of unilateral TileC type sacral fracture were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 26 cases were treated with percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation and 37 cases with percutaneous reconstruction plate fixation. The operative time, intraoperative bleeding volume, total incision length, X-ray exposure times and fracture healing time were compared between the two groups. The clinical efficacy was evaluated according to Matta and Majeed criteria. Results: all 63 patients were followed up for 12 months and 36 months. No iatrogenic neurovascular injury, incision infection, loosening or fracture of internal fixation, nonunion of fracture and unequal length of lower limbs were found in all patients. There were significant differences in operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, total incision length, X-ray exposure times, Matta criteria and Majeed criteria, but no significant difference in fracture healing time between the two groups. Conclusion: percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation is superior to percutaneous reconstruction plate fixation in blood loss, total incision length and clinical efficacy, but the surgical risk is greater and the technical requirements are higher, so it is suitable for experienced treatment group. The clinical effect of percutaneous reconstruction plate fixation is less than that of percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation, but the operation time and X-ray exposure times are better, and the operation is relatively simple, which is easy to popularize in basic hospitals.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：新疆醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：R687.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 葛振新;王奔;張東正;劉兆杰;張銀光;賈健;;影響Tile C型骨盆損傷髂腰固定術(shù)后療效的相關(guān)因素分析[J];中國修復(fù)重建外科雜志;2012年11期

，

本文編號(hào)：2467873