对比经皮微创锁定重建钢板与传统开放内固定术治疗锁骨中段移位骨折的疗效

Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Locking Reconstruction Plate Versus Traditional Open Internal Fixation in Treatment of Displaced Midshaft Clavicular Fractures

目的对比经皮微创锁定重建钢板与传统开放内固定术治疗锁骨中段移位骨折的疗效。方法将整群选取的2013年2月—2014年8月期间收治的96例锁骨中段位移骨折患者均分为两组,每组各48例,对照组采取传统开放内固定术进行治疗,观察组采取经皮微创锁定重建钢板进行治疗,观察对比两组患者术中及术后各项情况变化。结果观察组术后皮肤刺激征及固定器失效率分别为8.33%、2.08%,均明显优于对照组,组间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组手术时间、手术出血量、住院时间以及骨折处愈合时间均显著优于对照组(P<0.05)。结论采取经皮微创锁定重建钢板治疗锁骨中段移位骨折,手术用时和住院时间短,且术中出血量少,患者恢复更快。

Objective To compare the efficacy between minimally invasive percutaneous locking reconstruction plate and traditional open internal fixation in the treatment of displaced clavicular fractures. Methods 96 patients with displaced midshaft clavicular fractures admitted between February 2013 and August 2014 were assigned to two groups with 48 in each one. The control group underwent traditional open internal fixation, while the observation group was treated with minimally invasive percutaneous locking reconstruction plate. The changes of intraoperative and postoperative indicators were observed and compared between the two groups. Results The rate of skin stimulus and fixation failure were 8.33%, 2.08% in the observation group, significantly superior to those in the control group, and there were statistically significant differences between them(P<0.05). The operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, as well as the fracture healing time were all less in the observation group than in the control group(P<0.05). Conclusion Minimally invasive percutaneous locking reconstruction plate in treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures can bring shorter operative time and length of stay, less bleeding during the operation, and quick recovery.