解剖钢板与锁定钢板治疗胫骨平台骨折的疗效比较

Effect Comparison of Locking Plate and Ordinary Anatomical Type Plate Internal Fixation for the Treatment of Tibial Plateau Fracture

目的:比较锁定钢板与普通解剖型钢板置入内固定治疗胫骨平台骨折疗效的差异。方法:本院2009年4月-2015年1月应用胫骨近端钢板治疗胫骨平台骨折56例,按照治疗方法的不同分为锁定钢板组(n=21)和解剖钢板组(n=35)。比较两组术中出血量、住院时间、骨折愈合时间、患膝关节活动范围、胫骨平台内翻角、胫骨平台后倾角、HSS评分及Rasmussen评分等指标。结果:所有患者均得到随访,随访平均时长为13个月。两组手术相关指标、患膝关节活动度、胫骨平台内翻角、胫骨平台后倾角、HSS评分及Rasmussen评分方面比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:治疗胫骨平台骨折,锁定钢板并不优于普通解剖钢板。

Objective： To observe the effect of locking plate and ordinary anatomical type plate internal fixation for the treatment of tibial plateau fracture.Method ： A total of 56 cases of tibial plateau fracture were treated with proximal tibial plate from April 2009 to January 2015 and were divided into locking plate group （ n=21 ） and anatomical plate （ n=35 ） .Operative blood loss, length of hospital stay, fracture time healing, motion range of injured knee, tibial varus angulation, posterior slope angle, HSS score and Rasmussen score of two groups were compared.Result： All patients were followed up with an average follow-up of 13 inonths, there was no statistical significance in operative blood loss, length of hospital stay, fracture time healing, motion range of injured knee, tibial varus angulation, posterior slope angle, HSS score and Rasmussen score of two groups （P〉0.05） . Conclusion： Locking plate is not better than non-locking anatomical plate in treating tibial plateau fractures.