摘要
目的:比较Cable-Ready内固定系统及传统钢丝内固定治疗髌骨横行骨折的临床效果及其优缺点。方法:回顾2007年8月-2010年12月收治的98例髌骨横行骨折患者,其中应用Cable-Ready内固定系统治疗42例,应用钢丝内固定治疗56例,记录患者的手术时间、术中出血量、医疗费用、住院时间、骨折愈合时间及远期膝关节功能恢复状况,比较两者之间的差异。结果:98例患者全部获得随访,Cable-Ready组患者的手术时间(40.2±8.9)min、术中出血量(65.3±10.2)ml明显少于钢丝内固定组患者,但医疗费用(1.26±0.12)万元远高于后者。比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。在住院时间、骨折愈合时间及远期膝关节功能恢复状况方面两组比较无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:Cable-Ready内固定系统治疗髌骨横行骨折具有操作简单、手术时间短及疗效可靠等优点,但医疗费用较昂贵,是一种可供选择的髌骨骨折内固定治疗方法。
0bjective：To compare the clinical effect and application value of Cable-Ready system and steel wire in the treatment of transverse patellar fracture.Method：98 cases of transverse patellar fracture patients were admitted in our hospital from August 2007 to December 2010.42 cases were treated with Cable-Ready system and 56 cases with steel wire.The operation time,blood loss,medical costs,hospital stay,bone union time and long-term recovery of knee function in the two groups were recorded and analyzed.Result：All patients were followed up,The operation time（40.2±8.9）min and blood loss（65.3±10.2）ml of Cable-Ready system treatment group were less than those of steel wire treatment group,but the medical cost（1.26±0.12） thousand yuan was much higher than the latter,there were statistically significant differences.The hospital stay,bone union time and long-term recovery of knee function between the two groups had no significant difference.Conclusion：Cable-Ready system has the advantage of simple,effective and reliable in dealing with transverse patellar fracture,but meanwhile expensive,it is a selectable method in the treatment of transverse patellar fracture.
出处
《中国医学创新》
CAS
2013年第24期25-27,共3页
Medical Innovation of China
