期刊文献+

股骨近端螺旋髓内钉和螺杆髓内钉内固定治疗股骨转子间骨折疗效比较 被引量:1

Comparison of helical and screw proximal femoral nails in treatment of intertrochanteric fracture
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的分析比较股骨近端螺旋髓内钉(HPFN)和螺杆髓内钉(SPFN)内固定治疗股骨转子间骨折的手术疗效和安全性。方法83例股骨转子问骨折的患者中43例采用HPFN内固定治疗,40例采用SPFN内固定治疗。记录并比较两组患者平均手术时间、术中出血量、术后下床活动时间、骨折愈合时间、颈干角改变及并发症等情况,并对患者进行影像学评估、随访及术后功能性及活动性评估。结果 HPFN组患者社会功能评分及活动性评分均明显高于SPFN组患者,而并发症发生率低于SPFN组患者,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05或0.01)。两组患者平均手术时间、术中出血量、骨折愈合时间、术后下床活动时间及颈干角改变等的差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。结论 HPFN和SPFN均是治疗股骨转子间骨折的合适内固定器材,而HPFN在患者术后功能恢复及减少并发症方面优于SPFN。 Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of helical and screw proximal femoral nails (HPFN, SPFN) in treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. Methods Eighty- three patients with intertrochanteric fractures were enrol ed. Among them, 43 patients were treated with HPFN and 40 patients were treated with SPFN. The assessments of mean operative time, in-traoperative blood loss, postoperative ambulation time, healing time, the neck- shaft angle changes, complications, the radio-graphic evaluation, postoperative function and activities were performed. Results HPFN was better in terms of social function scores, mobility scores, and complication rates with statistical significance. No significant differences were found between HPFN and SPFN in terms of mean operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative ambulation time, healing time, the neck- shaft angle changes. Conclusion HPFN and SPFN are both suitable implants for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures, but HPFN has better postoperative functional recovery and lower complication rate than SPFN.
出处 《浙江医学》 CAS 2014年第1期16-18,22,共4页 Zhejiang Medical Journal
关键词 股骨近端螺旋髓内钉 股骨近端螺杆髓内钉 股骨转子间骨折 Helical proximal femoral nails Screw proximal femoral nails Intertrochanteric fractures
  • 引文网络
  • 相关文献

参考文献15

  • 1Strauss E,Frank J,Lee J. Helical blade versus sliding hip screw for treatment of unstable intertrochanteric hip fractures:a biomechanical evaluation[J].{H}Injury,2006,(10):984-989.
  • 2Lenich A,Fierlbeck J,Al-Munaj ed A. First clinical and biomechanical results of the Trochanteric Fixation Nail(TFN)[J].{H}TECHNOLOGY AND HEALTH CARE,2006,(4-5):403-409.
  • 3Jensen J S. Determining factors for the mortality fol owing hip fractures[J].{H}Injury,1984,(06):411-414.
  • 4Fogagnolo F,Kfuri M Jr,Paccola C A. Intramedul ary fixation of pertrochanteric hip fractures with the short AO-ASIF proximal femoral nail[J].{H}Archives of Orthopaedic and Traumatic Surgery,2004,(01):31-37.
  • 5Pajarinen J,Lindahl J,Michelsson O. Pertrochanteric femoral fractures treated with a dynamic hip screw or a proximal femoral nail.A randomized study comparing post-operative rehabilitation[J].{H}JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME,2005,(01):76-81.
  • 6Schipper I B,Steyerberg E W,Castelein R M. Treatment of unstable trochanteric fractures.Randomised comparison of the gamma nail and the proximal femoral nail[J].{H}JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME,2004,(01):86-94.
  • 7Al-Munaj ed A A,Hammer J,Mayr E. Biomechanical char-acterization of osteosyntheses for proximal femur fractures:helical blade versus screw[J].{H}Studies in Health Technology and Information,2008,(133):1-10.
  • 8Utril a A L,Reig J S,Munoz F M. Trochanteric gamma nail and compression hip screw for trochanteric fractures:a random-ized,prospective,comparative study in 210 elderly patients with a new design of the gamma nail[J].{H}Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma,2005,(04):229-233.
  • 9Parker M J,Palmer C R. A new mobility score for predicting mortali-ty after hip fracture[J].{H}JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME,1993,(05):797-798.
  • 10Singh M,Nagrath A R,Maini P S. Changes in trabecular pattern of the upper end of the femur as an index of osteoporosis[J].{H}Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume,1970,(03):457-467.

同被引文献6

引证文献1

;
使用帮助 返回顶部