两种入路治疗肱骨大结节撕脱骨折的疗效比较

Comparison of therapeutic effects between two approaches on avulsion fracture of greater tuberosity of humerus

目的:比较经三角肌入路和经三角肌胸大肌入路治疗肱骨大结节撕脱骨折的临床疗效。方法:收集2014年1月至2015年1月在我院接受手术治疗的单侧肱骨大结节撕脱骨折患者20例,根据手术入路的不同将其分为经三角肌入路组(A组)11例和经三角肌胸大肌入路组(B组)9例,比较2组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、手术切口长度及术后随访肩关节Neer评分优良率。结果:A组的术中出血量、手术切口长度均较B组为优。结论:2种手术入路均可治疗肱骨大结节撕脱骨折,以经三角肌入路方式术中出血量更少,切口更小。鉴于此,临床中对身体状况不佳、基础疾病较多及对手术切口美观程度要求较高患者可选择经三角肌入路。

Objective: To compare the therapeutic effects of deltoid approach with deltopectoral approach on avulsion fracture of greater tuberosity of humerus. Methods: 20 patients with unilateral avulsion fracture of greater tuberosity of humerus who received surgery in our hospital from January 2014 to January 2015 were divided into deltoid approach group( group A,11cases) and deltopectoral approach group( group B,9 cases). The operation time,intraoperative blood loss,length of incision and excellent rate of postoperative follow-up of shoulder Neer score were compared between the two groups. Results: The intraoperative blood loss and length of incision in group A were better than those in group B. Conclusion: For the treatment of avulsion fracture of the greater tuberosity of humerus,deltoid approach has less blood loss and smaller incision,which can be chosen in patients with poor physical condition,more underlying diseases,and higher aesthetic requirements.