Polarus髓内钉与Philos接骨板治疗肱骨近端骨折的早期疗效分析

A Comparative Analysis of Early Curative Effect of the Polarus Intramedullary Nailing and Philos Plate for Treating Proximal Humeral Fractures

目的探讨Polarus髓内钉与Philos接骨板治疗肱骨近端骨折的早期疗效。方法随机选取2010年1月至2015年5月就诊的肱骨近端骨折患者4 0例。根据治疗方法不同分为Polarus髓内钉组（15例,Ⅰ组）与Philos接骨板组（25例,Ⅱ组）。记录手术切口长度、手术时间、术中出血量及骨折愈合时间。40例患者随访6~36个月,平均随访时间（16.8±2.6）个月。末次随访时,按照Neer评分标准进行评估。结果Ⅰ组术中出血量[（80.5±20.4）ml]少于Ⅱ组[（120.5±12.8）ml]、手术时间[（73.5±10.8）min]短于Ⅱ组[（102.0±15.2）min],且切口平均长度[（6.8±1.4）cm]短于Ⅱ组[（11.6±2.3）cm],2组比较,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。在骨折愈合时间及Neer评分上,2组比较,差异无统计学意义。结论应用Polarus髓内钉治疗肱骨近端骨折可以减少术中出血量,缩短手术时间,切口更小,疗效满意,值得临床推广使用。

Objective To comparatively analyze the early curative effect of the Polarus intramedullary nailing and Philos plate for treating Proximal humeral fractures. Methods A total of 40 patients with proximal humeral fractures in our hospital from January 2011 to June 2015 were selected. There were 15 cases which were treated by Polarus intramedullary nailing in Polarus group（ GroupⅠ） and 25 cases which were treated by Philos plate in Philos group（ GroupⅡ）. The length of the surgical incision、postoperative healing time、intraoperative blood loss and the operation time of these patients are assessed.Results 40 cases were followed up with average time of（ 16. 8 ± 2. 6） months,the operating time of Polarus group was significantly less than Philos group（ P〈0. 05）,intraoperative blood loss of Polarus group was also significantly less than Philos group（ P〈0. 05）. The length of the surgical incision of Polarus group was also significantly less than Philos group（ P〈0. 05）. There were no significant differences in postoperative heal time,the operation time and Neer scores. Conclusion The way of the Polarus intramedullary nailing to treat proximal humeral fractures can acquire better restoration quality and limb function recovery. This method is worthy of clinical promotion.