骨水泥与生物固定用于髋关节结核人工全髋关节置换术的临床比较

Clinical Comparison of Bone Cement and Biological Fixation in Treatment of Hip Joint Tuberculosis in Total Hip Joint Replacement

目的骨水泥与生物固定用于髋关节结核人工全髋关节置换术的临床比较。方法选取我院2011年7月~2012年7月54例髋关节结核患者为研究对象,将患者抽签随机分为生物固定组与骨水泥组,每组27例。生物固定组给予生物固定人工全髋关节置换术,骨水泥组给予骨水泥人工全髋关节置换术,比较两组术中出血量、手术时间、住院时间及髋关节功能评分。结果生物固定组术中出血量（147.68±30.21）ml少于骨水泥组,手术时间（41.96±6.89）d短于骨水泥组,有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;两组住院时间比较无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。生物固定组优良率85.19%高于骨水泥组59.26%,有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论生物固定型人工全髋关节置换术治疗髋关节结核,可促进髋关节功能恢复,减少术中出血量,缩短手术时间,具有重要的临床应用价值。

Objective： To compare the clinical effect between bone cement and biological fixation in treating patients with hip joint tuberculosis in total hip joint replacement. Methods： Totally, 54 patients with hip joint tuberculosis in our hospital from July 2011 and July 2012 were selected as the objects of study. They were randomly divided into two groups of 27： one group of bone cement, another group of biological fixation. The patients in the group of biological fixation underwent total hip joint replacement with biological method, while the patients in the group of bone cement underwent total hip joint replacement with bone cement method. The peri-operative bleeding, operation time, hospitalized time and Harris hip scores in the two groups were compared. Results： The operation time[（41.96±6.89） d] and bleeding quantity [（147.68±30.21） ml] in group of biological fixation was significantly less than those in group of bone cement（P〈0.05）. However, the hospitalized time was compared with no significant difference（P〈0.05）. The excellence rate in group of biological fixation（85.19%） was significantly higher than that in group of bone cement（59.26%）（P〈0.05）. Conclusions： Total hip joint replacement with biological fixation in the treatment of hip tuberculosis can effectively promote the functional recovery of hip joint, and reduce intraoperative bleeding and the operative time, which has important value in clinical application.