切开复位内固定与经皮复位有限内固定结合外固定架治疗C型桡骨远端骨折的对比性研究

Comparative study of open reduction and internal fixation and percutaneous reduction with limited internal fixation combined with external fixator in the treatment of type C distal radius fractures

目的比较切开复位内固定与经皮复位有限内固定结合外固定架固定治疗C型桡骨远端骨折的疗效。方法回顾性分析2015年1月至2019年12月入我院治疗的50例C型桡骨远端患者,切开复位内固定组(IF组)25例,C1型10例,C2型11例,C3型4例。有限内固定结合外固定架固定组(EF组)25例,C1型9例,C2型11例,C3型5例。比较两组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、术后骨折愈合时间、术后Gartlang-Werley评分。结果所有患者均随访6至12个月,EF组手术时间、术中出血量及术后骨折愈合时间方面优于IF组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组间Gartlang-Werley评分即优良率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论对于C型桡骨远端骨折,经皮复位有限内固定结合外固定架固定更微创、操作简单、出血少,优于切开复位内固定组,但两种术式在术后功能恢复方面无明显差别。

Objective To compare the efficacy of plate and external fixator in the treatment of complex distal radius fractures.Methods From 2015 to 2019,50 patients with distal radius were retrospectively analyzed,including 25 cases of internal fixation(IF)group,10 cases of type C1,11 cases of type C2 and 4 cases of type C3.In external fixation(EF)Group,there were 25 cases(mean 53.7±3.4 years),9 cases(C1 Type),11 cases(C2 Type)and 5 cases(C3 Type).Both groups were evaluated with the Gartlang-werley score.Results All patients were followed up for 6 to 12 months.The operation time,intraoperative blood loss and postoperative fracture healing time of EF group were better than those of IF group,and the difference was statistically significant.The excellent and good rate of IF Gartlang-werley score was higher than that of EF group,and the difference was not statistically significant.Conclusion For type C distal radius fractures,percutaneous reduction and limited internal fixation combined with external fixation is more minimally invasive,simple and less bleeding,which is better than open reduction and internal fixation.But there was no significant difference in postoperative functional recovery between the two groups.