股骨近端防旋髓内钉和解剖锁定钢板治疗老年股骨转子间骨折的临床效果比较

详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |

英文篇名：Clinical Comparison of Proximal Femoral Anti-rotation Intramedullary Nail and Anatomical Locking Plate in the Treatment of Intertrochanteric Femoral Fractures in the Elderly 作者：彭文海 英文作者：PENG Wen-hai;The First People's Hospital of Mudanjiang; 关键词：股骨近端防旋髓内钉 ; 解剖锁定钢板 ; 老年股骨转子间骨折 英文关键词：Proximal femoral anti-rotation intramedullary nail;;Anatomical locking plate;;Senile intertrochanteric fracture 中文刊名：ZHJK 英文刊名：Smart Healthcare 机构：黑龙江省牡丹江市第一人民医院; 出版日期：2019-06-05 出版单位：智慧健康 年：2019 期：v.5 语种：中文; 页：ZHJK201916062 页数：2 CN：16 ISSN：10-1365/TN 分类号：140-141

摘要

目的股骨近端防旋髓内钉和解剖锁定钢板治疗老年股骨转子间骨折的临床效果比较。方法选择老年股骨转子间骨折患者42例,分为研究组和对照组,对照组患者采用ALP进行治疗,而研究组患者则采用PFNA进行治疗,比较两组患者的临床手术指标以及术后Harris评分结果。结果研究组患者的切口长度、手术时间以及出血量较之对照组要更低,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论在临床老年股骨转子间骨折患者的治疗中,PFNA和ALP的临床治疗效果相近,患者骨折愈合时间也差异不大,但是采用PFNA进行手术的各项手术指标要明显好于ALP,能够有效降低手术对患者的影响,保证患者的临床体验,值得推广。
        Objective To compare the clinical effects of proximal femoral nail and anatomical locking plate in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures in the elderly. Methods Forty-two patients with intertrochanteric fractures in the elderly were divided into study group and control group. Patients in the control group were treated with ALP.Patients in the study group were treated with PFNA. The clinical indexes of the two groups were compared with the postoperative harris rating results. Results The incision length, operative time, and bleeding volume of the study group were lower than those of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). Conclusion PFNA and ALP in the treatment of clinical elderly patients with intertrochanteric fractures The clinical treatment effect is similar, and the fracture healing time of patients is not much different, but the surgical indexes using PFNA for surgery are significantly better than ALP, which can effectively reduce the impact of surgery on patients and ensure the clinical experience of patients, which is worth promoting.

引文

[1]谢逸波,曾波,李培浩,等.股骨近端防旋髓内钉和解剖锁定钢板治疗老年股骨转子间骨折的效果比较[J].中国矫形外科杂志,2017,25(10):950-953.
    [2]吴长明,王立山,侯福安.股骨近端解剖锁定钢板与股骨近端防旋髓内钉治疗股骨转子间骨折的有效性和安全性[J].医学综述,2017,23(3):609-612.
    [3]谢晓敏,陈宇飞,周晓庆,等.股骨近端防旋髓内钉与股骨近端解剖型锁定钢板治疗老年不稳定型股骨转子间骨折的效果比较[J].中国医药导报,2017,14(21):90-93.
    [4]高澎.用股骨近端防旋髓内钉内固定术对老年股骨转子间骨折患者进行治疗的效果研究[J].当代医药论丛,2017,15(19):124-125.
    [5]余绍金,崔智伟.股骨近端防旋髓内钉与锁定钢板治疗老年股骨转子间骨折[J].牡丹江医学院学报,2017,38(5):84-86.
    [6]国庆.股骨近端防旋髓内钉与股骨近端解剖型锁定钢板治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折的临床效果研究[J].实用临床医药杂志,2017,21(3):138-140.
    [7]韦小蕊,赵峥峥.股骨近端防旋髓内钉(PFNA)与股骨近端解剖锁定钢板(LP)内固定治疗老年不稳定股骨粗隆间骨折的价值比较[J].世界最新医学信息文摘,2018,18(33):80,84.
    [8]郭健.股骨近端防旋髓内钉板治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折的临床效果[J].医学理论与实践,2017,30(13):1946-1948.
    [9]康永奇.股骨近端防旋髓内钉与解剖锁定接骨板固定治疗老年不稳定性股骨转子间骨折的临床效果比较[J].中国临床新医学,2017,10(10):975-977.
    [10]王卫军.股骨近端防旋髓内钉与锁定钢板内固定治疗股骨转子间骨折临床疗效比较[J].中国临床新医学,2018,11(5):469-472.