摘要
目的：评价微创经皮穿针内固定与切开复位解剖钢板内固定两种方法治疗锁骨中段骨折的临床疗效。方法：2013年6月至2015年2月，对60例锁骨中段骨折患者，分别采用微创经皮穿针内固定与切开复位解剖钢板内固定两种方法治疗，观察术中出血量、手术时间、骨折愈合时间、术后并发症及肩关节功能（Constant评分），并进行对比研究。结果：两组手术时间、术中出血量比较，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。60例均获得6～8个月的随访，平均（6．47±0．22）个月。穿针组骨性愈合时间平均（9．99±0．28）周，钢板组平均（14．99±0．45）周，两组差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。功能评定按照Constant肩关节评分标准，穿针组平均分为（92．00±1．20）分，钢板组平均分为（91．44±1．45）分，两组差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。两组术后并发症发生率比较，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论：微创经皮穿针内固定较切开复位钢板内固定治疗锁骨中段骨折具有手术创伤小、术中出血少，骨折愈合快、功能恢复好等优点，值得临床推广。
Objective：To evaluate and compare the efficacy of percutaneous intramedullary nail fixation and open reduction with plate fixation for treating midshaft clavicular fractures. Methods： All 60 patients with midshaft clavicular fraclures were randomly received either intramedullary nail fixation or open reduction with plate fixation from June 2013 to Febru- ary 2015. The blood loss, operation time, bone revealing time, complications, and Constant score were compared between the two groups. Results：The blood loss and operation time were significantly different between the two groups（P〈0.05）. They were followed up for 6 to 8 months,for 6.47±0.22 months averagely. The mean revealing time of fracture bone in intramedullary nail group was significantly lower than plate group（9.99 ±0.28 weeks versus 14. 99± 0.45 weeks, P〈 0.05）. The Constant score was not significantly different between the two groups（92.00 ± 1. 20 versus 91. 44 ± 1. 45 points, P〉0.05）, and the complication rate was not significantly different between the two groups（P〉0.05 ）. Conclusion： The pereutaneous intramedullary nail fixation has the advantages of less soft tissue injury, less blood loss, shorter bone re- vealing time,and can also achieve well function. It is worth for clinical application.
出处
《中国中医骨伤科杂志》
CAS
2015年第12期42-45,共4页
Chinese Journal of Traditional Medical Traumatology & Orthopedics
关键词
锁骨骨折
中段
内固定
临床研究
clavicular fractures
midshaft
internal fixation
clinical trial
