期刊文献+

锁定钢板与空心螺钉治疗肱骨大结节骨折的疗效比较 被引量:5

Comparison of Curative Effect between Locking Plate and Cannulated Screw for the Treatment of Humeral Greater Tuberosity Fracture
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的:比较锁定钢板与空心螺钉治疗肱骨大结节骨折的临床疗效及安全性。方法:对2010年1月至2013年1月手术治疗的8l例单纯肱骨大结节骨折患者进行回顾性分析,患者均行切开复位内固定,固定方式分别采用锁定钢板与空心螺钉。围手术期观察指标为:手术时间、术中出血量、住院天数等。术后按时间节点随访,至少为术后1年,最终随访时给予X线摄片以观察愈合情况,采用ASES评分、Constant—Murley评分及VAS评分评估肩关节功能及疼痛程度。结果:63例患者获得随访,随访时间1-3年,平均1.9年。钢板组(33例)ASES评分(91.01±4.88)分、Constant—Murley评分(90.21:1:3.97)分、VAS评分(0.58±0.63)分,满意率为93.94%;螺钉组(30例)ASES评分(80.58±6.72)分、Constant—Murley评分(80.67±7.25)分、VAS评分(1.08±0.68)分,满意率为73.33%,差异均有统计学意义(P〈O.05)。结论:肱骨近端锁定钢板治疗单纯肱骨大结节骨折固定可靠,安全性较高,肩关节功能恢复好。并发症发生率较低。可获得较为满意的临床效果。 Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes and safety between locking plate and cannulated screw for the treatment of humeral greater tuberosity fracture. Methods: 81 cases of patients with isolated humeral greater tuberosity fracture from January 2010 to January 2013 were reviewed retrospectively. All of patients were treated by open reduction and fixation with locking plate(LPHP group) or cannulated screws (screw group). Perioperative conditions such as operation time, hospitalization days, intraoperative blood loss were recorded. Postoperative follow-up were carried out according to the time point, follow-up duration was at least one year. X-ray was carried out for observing fracture healing at final follow-up. The visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, American shoulder and elbow surgeon (ASES) score and Constant-Murley scoring system for shoulder function evaluation were recorded. Results: 63 eligible patients could be followed up. Duration of follow-up was 1 to 3 years, the mean follow-up time was 1.9 years. In the LPHP group (33 patients), ASES scores averaged 91.01, Constant-Murley scores averaged 90.21, VAS scores was (P25-P75, 0-1.00), the satisfaction rate of the LPHP goup was 93.94%; in the screw group (30 patients), ASES scores averaged 80.58, Constant-Murley scores averaged 80.67, VAS scores was (P25-P75, 0.5-1.63), the satisfaction rate of the screw group was 73.33%. Differences between two groups were statistically significant (P〈0.05). Conclusions: Compared with cannulated screw fixation, treatment for isolated greater tuberosity fracture with LPHP has the advantage of more stable fixation, higher security, better shoulder function and lower incidence of complications, therefore can obtain satisfactory clinical results.
出处 《现代生物医学进展》 CAS 2015年第14期2670-2673,共4页 Progress in Modern Biomedicine
基金 上海市科学技术委员会项目(13DZ1940704)
关键词 肱骨近端骨折 大结节 锁定钢板 空心螺钉 Proximal humeral fracture Greater tuberosity Locking plate Cannulated screw
  • 相关文献

参考文献20

  • 1Mutch J, Laflamme GY, Hagemeister N, et al. A new morphological classification for greater tuberosity fractures of the proximal humerus: validation and clinical implications [J]. Bone Joint J, 2014, 96-b(5): 646-651.
  • 2Chowdary U, Prasad H, Subramanyam PK. Outcome of locking compression plating for proximal humeral fractures: a prospective study[J]. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong), 2014, 22(1): 4-8.
  • 3Bono CM, Renard R, Levine RG, et al. Effect of displacement of fractures of the greater tuberosity on the mechanics of the shoulder[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 2001, 83(7): 1056-1062.
  • 4Mattyasovszky SG, Burkhart KJ, Ahlers C, et al. Isolated fractures of the greater tuberosity of the retrospective study of 30 patients 20 proximal humerus: a long-term [J]. Acta Orthop, 2011, 82(6):714-7.
  • 5高述玲,林治建,丛培军,杨茂清.解剖锁定钢板内固定治疗肱骨大结节骨折[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2012,27(1):90-91. 被引量:6
  • 6Yin B, Moen TC, Thompson SA, et al. Operative treatment of isolated greater tuberosity fractures: retrospective review of clinical and functional outcomes[J]. Orthopedics, 2012, 35(6): e807-814.
  • 7Neer CS, II. Displaced proximal humeral fractures. Part I. Classification and evaluation. By Charles S. Neer, I, 1970 [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1970, 52(6): 1077-1089.
  • 8Platzer P, Thalhammer G, Oberleitner G, et al. Displaced fractures of the greater tuberosity: a comparison of operative and nonoperative treatment[J]. J Trauma, 2008, 65(4): 843-848.
  • 9Debottis D, Anavian J, Green A. Surgical Management of Isolated Greater Tuberosity Fractures of the Proximal Humerus [J]. Orthop Clin North Am, 2014, 45(2): 207-218.
  • 10Rath E, Alkrinawi N, Levy O, et al. Minimally displaced fractures of the greater tuberosity: outcome of non-operative treatment [J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2013, 22(10): e8-el 1.

二级参考文献35

  • 1王海丰,黄磊,顾千里.可吸收螺钉治疗肱骨大结节骨折[J].现代中西医结合杂志,2005,14(1):88-89. 被引量:12
  • 2黄强,王满宜,荣国威.复杂肱骨近端骨折的手术治疗[J].中华骨科杂志,2005,25(3):159-164. 被引量:198
  • 3张德光,刘福全,刘爱华.肱骨近端骨折锁定加压接骨板内固定治疗肱骨近端骨折[J].中华创伤杂志,2006,22(11):836-838. 被引量:28
  • 4Kim E, Shin HK, Kim CH. Characteristics of an isolated greater tuberosity fracture of the humerus. J Orthop Sci, 2005, 10(5): 441-444.
  • 5Court-rown CM, Garg A, McQueen MM. The epidemiology of proximal humeral fractures. Acta Orthop Seand, 2001, 72(4): 365-371.
  • 6George MS. Fractures of the greater tuberosity of the humerus. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2007, 15(10): 607-613.
  • 7Platzer P, Kutscha-Lissberg F, Lehr S, et al. The influence of displacement on shoulder function in patients with minimally displaced fractures of the greater tuberosity. Injury, 2005, 36(10): 1185-1189.
  • 8Platzer P, Thalhammer G, Oberleitner G, et al. Displaced fractures of the greater tuberosity: a comparison of operative and nonoperative treatment. J Trauma, 2008, 65(4): 843-848.
  • 9Neer CS 2nd. Displaced proximal humeral fractures. I. Classification and evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 1970, 52(6): 1077-1089.
  • 10Green A, Izzi J Jr. Isolated fractures of the greater tuberosity of the proximal humerus. J Should Elbow Surg, 2003, 12(6): 641-649.

共引文献43

同被引文献47

引证文献5

二级引证文献22

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部