腕掌侧入路与腕背侧入路治疗腕舟骨骨折临床疗效的比较

Clinical effects' comparation between wrist palmar approach and wrist radial approach on treating fracture of scaphoid bone

目的:比较腕掌侧和腕背侧手术入路治疗腕舟骨骨折的临床效果。方法:38例新鲜不稳定性腕舟状骨骨折病人随机分为腕掌侧手术入路组21例和背侧手术入路17例,对其进行了术后一年的随访,以腕关节Cooney评分、骨折是否愈合、是否并发神经血管肌腱组织损伤进行疗效评估。结果:腕掌侧组中1例发生骨折不愈合,无神经血管肌腱组织损伤;腕背侧组中1例发生骨折不愈合,1例发生舟骨坏死,1例发生桡神经浅支损伤引起腕背侧感觉减退,1例发生桡动脉腕背支损伤。两组腕关节Cooney评分无统计学差异,愈合时间差异无统计学意义。结论:腕掌侧或背侧入路治疗腕舟骨骨折临床疗效无显著差异。

Objective：To compare the clinical effects between wrist palmar approach and wrist radial approach on treating fracture of scaphoid bone.Methods：thirty-eight fresh and instability fracture of scaphoid bone patients were random grouped into two groups： twenty-one wrist palmar approach and seventeen wrist radial approach.After one year＇follow-up visit,evaluate the two groups＇ effects with the Cooney＇standards or whether the fracture healing and whether injured the nerve and blood vessel.Results：One patient＇fracture was not healed and no patients had injured the nerve and vessel in the group of wrist palmar approach.One patient＇fracture was not healed and one patient＇s scaphoid bone was necrosis and one patient＇radial artery was injured and one patient＇radial nerve was injured in the group of wrist radial approach.the Cooney＇standards of wrist are not statistical differences in the two groups.Conclusion：There is no significant differences between wrist palmar approach and wrist radial approach on treating fracture of scaphoid bone.