手术治疗开放性胫腓骨骨折69例临床分析

Clinical Analysis on the Outcome of Operative Management of Open Tibiofibula Fracture

目的 探讨使用外固定支架和钢板内固定治疗胫腓骨开放性骨折的临床疗效.方法 回顾性分析2008年4月～2009年10月胫腓骨开放骨折69例,其中AOD外固定支架32例,AO加压钢板37例,比较两组骨折平均愈合时间、骨折感染率、骨折延迟愈合及不连率.结果 两组Ⅰ、Ⅱ型骨折平均愈合时间、骨折感染率、骨折延迟愈合及不连率差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）;两组Ⅲ型骨折平均愈合时间、骨折感染率、骨折延迟愈合及不连率差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）.结论 对于Ⅲ型胫腓骨开放性骨折,采用外固定支架固定优于钢板内固定,值得临床借鉴.

Objective To compare the clinical outcomes of the treatment of open fractures of tibia and fibula by external fixator and dynamic compression plate.Method Analyzing retrospectively a total of 69 cases with open fractures of tibia and fibula undergoing operation in our hospital.32 cases underwent AOD external fixator operation and 37 cases underwent AO dynamic compression plate from April 2008 to December 2009.Comparing the average healing time of fracture,the infection rate of fracture,the delayed union and nonunion fracture rate in the two groups. Result The average healing time of fracture,the infection rate of fracture,the delayed union and nonunion fracture rate between the two groups with type Ⅰand Ⅱof open fracture of tibia and fibula have no significant difference（P〉0.05）,but the average healing time of fracture,the infection rate of fracture,the delayed union and nonunion fracture rate between the two groups with type Ⅲ of open fracture of tibia and fibula have significant difference（P〈0.05）.Conclusion For type lit open fractures of tibia and fibula,the external fixator is more superior than plate fixation,it is worth using clinically.