早期体外冲击波疗法干预骨折延迟愈合不愈合临床疗效分析.docVIP

早期体外冲击波疗法干预骨折延迟愈合不愈合临床疗效分析.doc

此“医疗卫生”领域文档为创作者个人分享资料,不作为权威性指导和指引,仅供参考
  1. 1、原创力文档(book118)网站文档一经付费(服务费),不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。。
  2. 2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传,本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺!文档内容仅供研究参考,付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费,意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务;查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点击 这里二次下载
  3. 3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“版权申诉”(推荐),也可以打举报电话:400-050-0827(电话支持时间:9:00-18:30)。
  4. 4、该文档为VIP文档,如果想要下载,成为VIP会员后,下载免费。
  5. 5、成为VIP后,下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后,不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们
  6. 6、成为VIP后,您将拥有八大权益,权益包括:VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
  7. 7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传,每下载1次, 网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等,对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档
查看更多
早期体外冲击波疗法干预骨折延迟愈合不愈合临床疗效分析

早期体外冲击波疗法干预骨折延迟愈合不愈合临床疗效分析   【摘要】 目的:探讨早期体外冲击波疗法干预骨折延迟愈合不愈合的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析本院2010年6月-2013年12月收治的57例骨折延迟愈合不愈合患者的临床资料,所有患者均为稳定型骨折延迟愈合不愈合。按照术后时间分组,术后3~9个月共28例作为A组,术后9个月以上共29例作为B组。ESWT后每3个月复查X片,观察比较两组患者的骨痂生长情况。结果:治疗前以及第3疗程结束后,两组骨痂评分比较差异均无统计学意义(P0.05);而第1、2疗程结束后,两组骨痂评分比较差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。因此,A组在第1、2疗程结束后骨痂生长速度均明显快于B组(P0.05)。两组有效率在3个疗程间比较差异均无统计学意义(P1=0.670;P2=1.000;P3=1.000);两组第1、2疗程结束后的治愈率的比较差异均有统计学意义(P1=0.044;P2=0.047),而第3疗程比较差异无统计学意义(P3=0.190)。结论:早期行体外冲击波疗法干预可降低骨折延迟愈合或不愈合的发生率,值得临床推广。   【关键词】 体外冲击波疗法; 骨折延迟愈合不愈合; 血肿   【Abstract】 Objective:To investigate the clinical efficacy of early extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the treatment of delayed union and nonunion of fractures.Method:The clinical data of 57 patients with fracture delayed union or nonunion in our hospital from June 2010 to December 2013 were analyzed retrospectively,all patients were stable delayed union and nonunion of fractures.According to the time after the operation,28 patients for 3-9 months after the operation were selected as the group A,a total of 29 patients for more than 9 months after operation were selected as the group B.X-ray follow-ups were performed at every 3 months intervals,and the callus growth between the two groups were observed and compared.Result:Before the treatment and after the three courses of treatment,the callus score between the two groups had no statistical significance(P0.05).At the end of the first and second treatment,there were statistically significant differences in callus score between the two groups(P0.05).Therefore,the callus growth rate of the group A were significantly faster than the group B at the end of the first and second period of the treatment(P0.05).There was no significant difference in the efficiency between two groups in three periods of treatment(P1=0.670;P2=1.000;P3=1.000).The differences were statistically significant in the cure rate between the two groups at the end of the first and second period of the treatment(P1=0.044;P2=0.047),but there was n

文档评论(0)

bokegood + 关注
实名认证
文档贡献者

该用户很懒,什么也没介绍

1亿VIP精品文档

相关文档