2010年至2011年中国东部与西部地区成人骨盆骨折的流行病学对比分析

Epidemiological comparison of adult pelvic fractures between West China and East China from 2010 to 2011

目的对比分析我国东部地区与西部地区成人骨盆骨折的流行病学特征。方法回顾性分析2010年1月至2011年12月期间我国东部地区与西部地区63家医院诊治的成人骨盆骨折患者资料。将我国东部地区35家医院患者资料定为A组，西部地区28家医院患者资料定为B组，对比分析两组患者的性别、年龄及骨折AO分型等数据。结果共收集7896例患者，其中A组5683例，男2829例，女2854例，男女比为0．99：1；中位年龄为42岁，四分位数间距为30—55岁。B组2213例，男1123例，女1090例，男女比为1．03：1；中位年龄为41岁，四分位数间距为31～54岁。两组患者的男女比比较差异无统计学意义（r=0．594，P=0．441），而中位年龄比较差异有统计学意义（Z=-4．344，P=0．000）。A组和B组的骨折高发年龄段分别为31～40岁、41～50岁，构成比分别为21．50％、23．41％，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。A组和B组患者的骨折高发类型均为61-A型，构成比分别为82．23％、86．08％；骨折高发亚型均为61-A2型，构成比分别为41．47％、54．36％，差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论我国东部地区与西部地区成人骨盆骨折男女比基本一致。东部地区以31—40岁年龄段患者最多，西部地区以41～50岁年龄段患者居多；整体而言，西部地区患者更年轻。两个地区均以61-A型骨折最多，骨折高发亚型均为61-A2型，但西部地区61-A型和61-A2型骨折患者构成比显著高于东部地区。

Objective To compare and analyze the epidemiological features of adult pelvic fractures between West China and East China from 2010 to 2011. Methods The data of adult pelvic fractures treated from January 2010 to December 2011 in 63 hospitals in West China and East China were collected through the PACS system and case reports checking system. The data from the 35 hospitals in East China were assigned into group A and those from the 28 hospitals in West China into group B. The analytic items included gender, age, age distribution and type of AO classification. Results A total of 7, 896 cases were col- lected. In group A of 5,683 cases, there were 2, 829 males and 2, 854 females, with a male to female ratio of O. 99：1 and a median age of 42 years （interquartile range, from 30 to 55 years）. In group B of 2, 213 cases, there were 1, 123 males and 1, 090 females, with a male to female ratio of 1.03：1 and a median age of 41 years （interquartile range, from 31 to 54 years）. There was no significant difference in the male to female ratio between the 2 groups （X2 = 0. 594, P = 0. 441 ） but there was a significant difference in the median age （ Z = -4. 344, P = 0. 000）. The age distribution showed that the peak range was from 31 to 40 years in group A （with a proportion of 21.50% ） and from 41 to 50 years in group B （with a proportion of 23.41% ）, showing no significant difference between the 2 groups （P 〉 0. 05 ） . In both groups, type 61-A was the high risk type of fracture （82.23% in group A and 86.08% in group B）, and type 61-A2 the high risk subtype of fracture （41.47% in group A and 54. 36% in group B）, showing significant differences （P 〈 0. 05）. Conclusions East China and West China had similar male to female ratios in pelvic fractures. Generally, the patients in West China were younger, for the most patients in East China were aged from 31 to 40 years and those in West China from 41 to 50 years. In both East China and West China, type 61-A2 and subtype 61-A2 were the most common, but the proportions of type 61-A2 and subtype 61-A2 were higher in West China than in East China.