预断式带孔克氏针张力带与AO张力带治疗髌骨骨折疗效对比分析

Comparative analysis of treatment of patellar fractures between with Pre-disconneeted Tension Band with Perforated Kirschner and AO Tension Band

目的评价预断式带孔克氏针张力带与AO 克氏针张力带治疗髌骨骨折的疗效.方法回顾分析我院2010年7 月～2012 年6 月收治并随访的58 例髌骨骨折患者,分别采用预断式带孔克氏针张力带（预断式带孔组）和AO克氏针张力带（AO 组）进行治疗,分别从术中情况、术后恢复及术后患膝功能进行分析比较.结果手术时间、术中透视次数、术后并发症、术后患膝关节功能两组间有明显差异（P〈0.05）,即两组相比,预断式带孔组手术时间短,术中透视次数少,术后并发症少及患膝关节功能好但住院费用费用高,术中出血量、骨折临床愈合时间相当（P〉0.05）.结论对于能预处理成34-C1（AO/OTA 分类）的髌骨骨折,预断式带孔克氏针张力带总体优于AO克氏针张力带.

Objective To evaluate the effect of Pre-disconnected Tension Band with Perforated Kirschner and AOTensionBand Systemof Kirschner wire in the treatment of patellar fracture. Methods There were 58 cases with patellar fracturepatient up who were followed fromJuly 2010 to June 2012. They were treated with the 2 kinds of operations respectivelyPre-disconnected Tension Band with Perforated Kirschner, AO Tension Band System of Kirschner wire. Thedate of each group were collected for statistical analysis on the following aspects： circumstance of operation, resumesafter operation functional outcome. Results The differences of the perative time, fluoroscopy exposures, syndrome afteroperation, functional outcome after knee-joint operation between Pre-disconnected Tension Band with PerforatedKirschner and AO Tension Band（ P〈 0.05）, compared with AO Tension Band, Pre-disconnected Tension Band withPerforated Kirschner had shorter operative time, less number of fluoroscopy exposures and less syndrome after operation,functional outcome of knee-joint better, but more hospitalized expenses. No differences of blood loss and bonefracture heals time（P〉 0.05）. Conclusion As to deal with patellar fracture of 34-C1（Classification of AO/OTA）,Pre-disconnected Tension Band with Perforated Kirschner was superior to AO Tension Band in total.