PFN与InterTan内固定治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的比较研究

Comparative study of PFN and InterTan in treatment of femoral intertrochanteric fractures

目的回顾性对比分析2种股骨近端髓内钉PFN与InterTan内固定治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效。方法 160例股骨粗隆间骨折行PFN和InterTan内固定,其中A组(PFN内固定)78例,B组(InterTan内固定)82例,比较两组平均手术时间、术中失血量、切口长度、术中透视次数、骨折愈合时间、术后髋关节WOMAC评分。结果 B组在平均手术时间、术中出血量、切口长度、术中透视次数方面优于A组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);但两组平均骨折愈合时间及术后3、6、12个月髋关节WOMAC评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 PFN与InterTan髓内钉内固定治疗股骨粗隆间骨折术后疗效方面无明显差异,但InterTan内固定手术操作较简单、创伤较小。

Objective To compare retrospectively the clinical InterTan in the treatment of interuvchanteric fracture. Methods efficacy of two intramedullary fixation methods PFN and A total of 160 cases of femoral interuochanteric fractures underwent PFN and InterTan fixation respectively. All cases were divided into group A （PFN fixation, 78 cases） and group B 0nterTan fixed, 82 cases）. The mean operation time, blood loes, incision length, times of X-ray, fracture healing time, hip WOMAC scores were compared. ~ Group B was significantly better than group A in mean operation time, blood loss, incision length, and times of X-ray flnomecopy （P 〈0.05）. There were no significant difference between fracture healing time and postoperative 3, 6, 12 months hip WOMAC scores （P 〉0.05）. Conclusion There is no significant difference in the treatment of femoral intmtzoehanteric fracture efficacy between two intramed,dlAry fixation methods. But InterTan fiXed onoration is simDler and trauma less.