锁定钢板固定与普通解剖钢板固定在胫骨平台骨折患者治疗中的临床疗效及生活质量比较

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-6233.2017.10.004

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (2)

全文: PDF (1373 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要 目的: 探究锁定钢板固定与普通解剖钢板固定在胫骨平台骨折患者治疗中的临床疗效及生活质量比较。方法: 收集我院骨科收治的胫骨平台骨折患者82例,根据治疗方法不同分为对照组和试验组,每组各41例,两组患者入院后均给予患肢牵引、消肿以及补液等常规治疗方法,术前进行硬膜外全麻,试验组患者给予锁定钢板固定方案,对照组患者给予普通解剖钢板固定方案。治疗结束后对比分析临床疗效、生活质量、关节活动度以及术后并发症。结果: 治疗后与对照组相比,试验组临床总有效率较高(P<0.05),治疗后两组生活质量以及关节活动度升高(P<0.05),与对照组相比,试验组生活质量以及关节活动度较高(P<0.05)。与对照组术后并发症发生率9.76%相比,试验组术后并发症发生率31.71%较低,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论: 锁定钢板固定较普通解剖钢板固定相比,在胫骨平台骨折患者的治疗临床疗效显著,有效改善患者生活质量以及关节活动,是胫骨平台骨折的理想选择。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章

关键词 ：锁定钢板固定, 普通解剖钢板固定, 胫骨平台骨折

Abstract：Objective: To investigate the comparison of locking plate fixation and common anatomical plate fixation in the treatment of fracture of tibial plateau with clinical efficacy and quality of life. Methods: 82 patients with fracture of tibial plateau from department of orthopedics in our hospital were selected and randomly divided into the control group and the experiment group, 41cases in each group. Two groups were both received limb traction, swelling and rehydration and other conventional treatment methods, epidural anesthesia was performed before operation in the two groups. The experiment group were treated by locking plate fixation and the control group were treated by ordinary anatomical plate fixation. The clinical efficacy, quality of life, joint mobility and postoperative complications were compared. Results: Compared with the control group after treatment, the clinical total effective rate were higher in the experiment group, the quality of life and joint mobility were higher. Compared with the control group, the incidence of postoperative complications in control group (9.76%) was higher than that in the experiment group (31.71%). Conclusion: Locking plate fixation was higher than that of the normal anatomic plate fixation compared, in tibial plateau fractures treatment of patients with clinical curative effect significantly, effectively improve the quality of life of patients and joint activities is ideal for tibial plateau fractures.

Key words： Locking plate fixation Common anatomical plate fixation Tibial plateau fracture

基金资助:云南省应用基础研究基金资助项目,(编号:98CO18G)

通讯作者: 廖经武

引用本文:

刘路平, 李伟强, 陈磊杰, 王超然, 浦波, 解京明, 廖经武. 锁定钢板固定与普通解剖钢板固定在胫骨平台骨折患者治疗中的临床疗效及生活质量比较[J]. 河北医学, 2017, 23(10): 1595-1597.
LIU Luping, LI Weiqiang, CHEN Leijie, et al. Comparison of Locking Plate Fixation and common Anatomical Plate Fixation| in the Treatment of Fracture of Tibial Plateau with |Clinical Efficacy and Quality of life. 河北医学, 2017, 23(10): 1595-1597.

链接本文:

http://www.hbyxzzs.cn/CN/10.3969/j.issn.1006-6233.2017.10.004 或 http://www.hbyxzzs.cn/CN/Y2017/V23/I10/1595

[1]Jost B, Spross C, Grehn H, et al. Locking plate fixation of fractures of the proximal humerus: analysis of complications, revision strategies and outcome[J].Shoulder Elb Surg, 2013, 22(4): 542~549.
[2] Streubel P N, Moustoukas M J, Obremskey W T. Mechanical failure after locking plate fixation of unstable intertrochanteric femur fractures[J].Orthop Trauma, 2013, 27(1): 22~28.
[3] Ruchholtz S, El-Zayat B, Kreslo D, et al. Less invasive polyaxial locking plate fixation in periprosthetic and peri-implant fractures of the femur-a prospective study of 41 patients[J].Injury, 2013, 44(2): 239~248.
[4] Johnson N A, Cutler L, Dias J J, et al. Complications after volar locking plate fixation of distal radius fractures[J].Injury, 2014, 45(3): 528~533.
[5] Graham S M, Moazen M, Leonidou A, et al. Locking plate fixation for Vancouver B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures: a critical analysis of 135 cases[J].Orthop Sci, 2013, 18(3): 426~436.
[6] Rhee S H, Kim J, Lee Y H, et al. Factors affecting late displacement following volar locking plate fixation for distal radial fractures in elderly female patients[J].Bone Joint, 2013, 95(3): 396~400.
[7] Moazen M, Mak J H, Etchels L W, et al. The effect of fracture stability on the performance of locking plate fixation in periprosthetic femoral fractures[J].Arthroplasty, 2013, 28(9): 1589~1595.
[8] Walenkamp M M J, Bentohami A, Beerekamp M S H, et al. Functional outcome in patients with unstable distal radius fractures, volar locking plate versus external fixation: a meta-analysis[J].Strateg Trauma Limb Reconstruction, 2013, 8(2): 67~75.
[9] Chen S H, Chiang M C, Hung C H, et al. Finite element comparison of retrograde intramedullary nailing and locking plate fixation with/without an intramedullary allograft for distal femur fracture following total knee arthroplasty[J].Knee, 2014, 21(1): 224~231.
[10] Karantana A, Downing N D, Forward D P, et al. Surgical treatment of distal radial fractures with a volar locking plate versus conventional percutaneous methods[J].Bone Joint Surg Am, 2013, 95(19): 1737~1744.
[11] Lee S K, Lee J W, Song D G, et al. Precontoured locking plate fixation for displaced lateral clavicle fractures[J].Orthopedics, 2013, 36(6): 801~807.
[12] Tarallo L, Mugnai R, Zambianchi F, et al. Volar plate fixation for the treatment of distal radius fractures: analysis of adverse events[J].Orthop Trauma, 2013, 27(12): 740~745.
[13] Gradl G, Knobe M, Stoffel M, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of locking plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures augmented with calcium phosphate cement[J].Orthopaedic Trauma, 2013, 27(7): 399~404.
[14] Kumar C, Gupta A K, Nath R, et al. Open reduction and locking plate fixation of displaced proximal humerus fractures[J].Indian Orthop, 2013, 47(2): 156.
[15] Esenwein P, Sonderegger J, Gruenert J, et al. Complications following palmar plate fixation of distal radius fractures: a review of 665 cases[J].Arch Orthop Traum Su, 2013, 133(8): 1155~1162.
[16] Ebraheim N A, Sochacki K R, Liu X, et al. Locking plate fixation of periprosthetic femur fractures with and without cerclage wires[J].Orthop Surg, 2013, 5(3): 183~187.