26例同侧股骨近端及骨干骨折的两种内固定治疗的比较

Comparison of two methods for the internal fixation treatment of 26 patients with ipsilateral femoral proximal and shaft fractures

目的：比较重建带交锁髓内针和近端锁定解剖钢板两种内固定方法治疗同侧股骨近端及骨干骨折的临床结果。方法选取同侧股骨近端及骨干骨折患者26例，其中12例应用重建带交锁髓内针内固定治疗（A组），14例应用近端锁定解剖钢板内固定治疗（B组）。比较两组骨折至手术时间、手术时间、术中出血量、骨折愈合时间、髋关节功能（采用Majeed功能评分）。结果 A组和B组骨折至手术时间、手术时间、术中出血量、股骨近端愈合时间、股骨干愈合时间和Majeed功能评分比较差异无统计学意义[（6.65±4.11）d比（7.13±4.56）d、（131.08±20.70）min比（141.86±27.30） min、（470.83±96.43）ml 比（553.57±127.80） ml、（17.83±2.70）周比（18.29±5.12）周、（20.08±3.97）周比（21.55±4.19）周、（83.83±8.13）分比（83.21±9.58）分，P＞0.05]。根据Majeed功能评分判定疗效：A组优7例，良4例，中1例；B组：优9例，良3例，中2例。结论应用一种内固定装置固定两处骨折为佳；两种内固定治疗方法均能取得满意疗效，要根据患者骨折类型以及术者对于内固定手术的熟练情况确定内固定方式；术中应先将股骨近端骨折复位稳定；手术时间要根据患者肢体情况，延迟5～6d不会影响手术治疗效果。

Objective To compare the curative effect of internal fixation treatment between reconstruction-type intramedullary nailing and long anatomic proximal femoral locking plate for patients with ipsilateral femoral proximal and shaft fractures. Methods Twenty-six patients with ipsilateral femoral proximal and shaft fractures were selected, among whom 12 patients were treated with reconstruction-type intramedullary nailing internal fixation treatment （group A）, and 14 patients were treated with long anatomic proximal femoral locking plate internal fixation treatment （group B）. The fracture to operation time, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, fracture healing time and hip joint function according to Majeed function score were compared between 2 groups. Results The fracture to operation time, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, proximal femoral fracture healing time, femoral shaft fracture healing time and Majeed function score in group A were （6.65 ± 4.11） d, （131.08 ± 20.70） min, （470.83 ± 96.43） ml, （17.83 ± 2.70） weeks, （20.08 ± 3.97） weeks and （83.83 ± 8.13） scores, and those in group B were （7.13 ± 4.56） d, （141.86 ± 27.30） min, （553.57 ± 127.80） ml, （18.29 ± 5.12） weeks, （21.55 ± 4.19） weeks and （83.21 ± 9.58） scores, and there were no statistical differences （P＆gt;0.05）. According to Majeed function score, in group A excellent was in 7 cases, good in 4 cases, and general in 1 case; in group B excellent was in 9 cases, good in 3 cases, and general in 2 cases. Conclusions A fixation device fixes two fracture is preferred. Both treatment methods used in the present study could achieve satisfactory curative effect, and should be chosen according to the fracture type of the patients and the surgeon′s familiarity for the methods of internal fixation chosen. The proximal femoral fracture should preferably be reduced and stabilized first. A delay of 5 - 6 d would not affect the ultimate curative effect.