不同内固定方法治疗胫骨骨折的临床比较.docVIP

不同内固定方法治疗胫骨骨折的临床比较 　　[摘要] 目的 探讨不同内固定方法治疗胫骨骨折的临床效果。 方法 研究对象整群选取于该院2013年6月―2014年9月接诊的62例胫骨骨折患者，将其随机均分为对照组与观察组，各31例。对照组采用加压钢板内固定术治疗；观察组采用交锁髓内钉固定术治疗。统计两组患者手术时长、骨折愈合时间、下床负重时间、术后并发症发生率等指标，随访1年调查两组骨折愈合优良率。 结果 观察组患者下床负重时间（45.9±11.1）d优于对照组（115.4±13.3）d，对比差异有统计学意义（P0.05）。 结论 加压钢板内固定和交锁髓内钉固定治疗胫骨骨折各有优势，临床应结合患者适应证，正确选择固定方法，以获得理想疗效。 中国论文网 /6/view-7165136.htm 　　[关键词] 骨折固定术；胫骨骨折；临床疗效 　　[中图分类号] R5 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1674-0742（2015）09（c）-0055-02 　　[Abstract] Objective To explore the clinical effects of different internal fixation methods for treating tibial fractures. Methods 62 cases of patients with tibial fractures admitted into the hospital from June 2013 to September 2014 were taken as the research object and were randomly divided into the control group and the observation group with 31 cases in each. The control group was treated with compression plate internal fixation while the observation group was treated with interlocking intramedullary nailing fixation. The time for operation， fracture healing and out of bed load， the occurrence rate of complications and other indicators of the two groups were statistically analyzed. With a year of follow-up， the good and excellent rate of fracture healing was investigated. Results In the observation group， the time to out of bed load was（45.9±11.1） d which was better than（11.54±13.3） d in the control group and the difference was statistically significant（P0.05）. Conclusion Compression plate internal fixation and interlocking intramedullary nailing fixation for treating tibial fractures have their own advantages. In clinic， the fixation method should be correctly chosen according to patients’ indications to obtain the ideal effect. 　　[Key words] Fracture fixation； Tibial fractures； Clinical efficacy 　　作为链接股骨、支撑体重的主要骨骼，胫骨中下段是骨折高发部位。胫骨骨折多由胫骨骨干受碾压、撞击、滑倒所致，临床表现以局部疼痛、肿胀，肉眼可见畸形为主[1]。其发生不但可造成小腿下段严重缺血坏死，还可引缺血性肌痉挛，预后较差。临床治疗胫骨骨折的方法有很多，其中以内固定手术最为常见。为提高胫骨骨折治疗水平，该研究2013年6月―2014年9月间将该院接诊的患者作为研究对象，探讨不同内固定方法治疗胫骨骨折的临床效果，现报道如下。 　　1 资料与方法 　　1.1 一般资料