外固定架治疗胫腓骨开放性骨折并发血管神经损伤的临床效果

Analysis of the clinical effect of treating open fracture of tibia and fibula complicated with vessel and nerve injury by external fixation

目的：探讨外固定架治疗胫腓骨开放性骨折并发血管神经损伤临床效果。方法选择2013年1月至2014年7月89例胫腓骨开放性骨折并发血管神经损伤患者为研究对象，将其随机分为 A、B 两组。A 组采取外支架固定治疗，B 组采取钢板固定，比较两组患者治疗前后骨折恢复情况、关节功能恢复优良率、并发症发生率。结果 A 组创面愈合时间、骨折愈合时间分别为（23.2±2.5）d、（96.2±14.7）d，短于 B 组，差异有统计学意义（P ﹤0.05）；A 组优良率为75.6％，B 组为68.2％，差异未见统计学意义（P ﹥0.05）；A 组并发症发生率为6.7％，低于 B 组的22.7％，差异有统计学意义（P ﹤0.05）。结论外固定架治疗胫腓骨开放性骨折并发血管神经损伤具有操作简便、减轻手术创伤的优点，并发症少，术后恢复快，为开放性骨折并发血管神经损伤的有效治疗方案。

Objective To investigate the clinical effect of treating open fracture of tibia and fibula complicated with vessel and nerve injury by external fixation. Methods Eighty nine cases of tibia open fracture patients complicated with vessel and nerve injury from January 2013 to July 2014 were chosen as research objects and were randomly divided into group A and group B. Group A were treated with external fixation while group B were given the plate fixation. The excellent and good rate of fracture recovery and recovery of joint function,the occurrence rate of complications of the two groups be-fore and after the treatment were compared. Results In group A,the healing time of wounds and fracture respectively were （23. 2 ±2. 5）d and（96. 2 ±14. 7）d,which were shorter than group B. The difference was significant（P ﹤0. 05）. In group A,the excellent and good rate was 75. 6% while group B was 68. 2% ,which had no significant difference（P ﹥ 0. 05）. The occurrence rate of group A was 6. 7% ,which was lower than that of group B（22. 7% ）and the difference was significant （P ﹤ 0. 05）. Conclusions There were advantages to use external fixation for the treatment of open fracture complicated with vessel and nerve injury,such as simplicity and lessen surgical trauma. What is more,there is less complications and it can help patients recover quickly. So it’s an effective treatment plan.