3D技术辅助手术治疗不稳定骨盆骨折的疗效分析

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-6233.2024.05.021

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (1371 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要 目的: 分析3D技术辅助手术治疗不稳定型骨盆骨折的疗效。方法: 选择2020年3月至2022年9月就诊于我院的骨盆骨折患者80例,符合Tile分型中的B型、C型不稳定骨折。以随机数字表法作为分组方式将患者分为观察组(n=40)与对照组(n=40)。对照组采取传统手术方式,观察组应用3D技术辅助手术。比较两组围手术期相关指标,术后6个月骨盆功能,统计两组术后6个月内并发症发生情况。结果: 观察组术中出血量与对照组相较更低,手术与拆线时间分别与对照组相较更短,手术费用较对照组高(t=-3.967、-2.194、-2.134、-2.301,P<0.05);术后1周,观察组骨折复位总满意度为95.00%,高于对照组的80.00%(χ²=4.114,P<0.05);观察组术后6个月骨盆功能优良率为87.50%,高于对照组的67.50%(χ²=4.588,P<0.05);观察组术后6个月并发症总发生率(7.50%)与对照组(10.00%)的差异无统计学意义(χ²=0.157,P>0.05)。结论: 3D技术辅助手术治疗骨盆骨折,可以缩短手术时间,减少出血量,减少术后拆线时间,提高骨折复位的优良率和骨盆功能,疗效突出。

	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
	宋健
	王培勇
	李怀任
	房好林

关键词 ：骨盆骨折, 3D技术辅助, 不稳定型, 疗效

Abstract：Objective: To analyze the effectiveness of three-dimensional (3D) technology-assisted surgery in the treatment of unstable pelvic fractures. Methods: Eighty patients with pelvic fractures treated in our hospital from March 2020 to September 2022 were selected. All patients met the criteria for Tile B and C unstable fractures. Patients were randomly divided into an observation group (n=40) and a control group (n=40) using a random number table. The control group was treated with traditional surgery, and the observation group was treated with 3D technology-assisted surgery. The two groups were compared in terms of peri-operative related indicators, pelvic function 6 months after surgery, and the incidence of complications within 6 months after surgery. Results: The observation group had lower intraoperative bleeding compared to the control group, shorter surgical and suture removal times compared to the control group, and the surgical cost is higher than that of the control group (t=-3.967、-2.194、-2.134、-2.301,P<0.05). Within one week after surgery, imaging in the observation group showed a total satisfaction rate of 95.00% with fracture reduction, which was higher than 80.00% in the control group (χ²=4.114,P<0.05). The excellent and good rate of pelvic function in the observation group at 6 months after surgery was 87.50%, higher than the 67.50% in the control group (χ²=4.588,P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the total incidence of complications 6 months after surgery between the observation group (7.50%) and the control group (10.00%) (χ²=0.157,P>0.05). Conclusion: 3D technology-assisted surgical treatment for pelvic fractures can shorten the operation time, reduce blood loss, reduce the time for postoperative suture removal, improve the excellent rate of fracture reduction and pelvic function, and achieve remarkable efficacy.

Key words： Pelvic fracture 3D printing assistance Unstable type Efficacy

基金资助:山东省医药卫生科技发展计划项目,(编号:202204070583)

通讯作者: 王培勇

引用本文:

宋健, 王培勇, 李怀任, 房好林. 3D技术辅助手术治疗不稳定骨盆骨折的疗效分析[J]. 河北医学, 2024, 30(5): 820-823.
SONG Jian, WANG Peiyong, FANG Haolin, et al. Analysis of the Efficacy of 3D Technology-Assisted Surgical Treatment for Unstable Pelvic Fractures. HeBei Med, 2024, 30(5): 820-823.

链接本文:

http://www.hbyxzzs.cn/CN/10.3969/j.issn.1006-6233.2024.05.021 或 http://www.hbyxzzs.cn/CN/Y2024/V30/I5/820

[1] 戚浩天,田维,刘兆杰,等.机器人辅助骨盆后环通道螺钉内固定治疗青少年不稳定型骨盆骨折[J].中华骨科杂志,2022,42(10):635-643.
[2] 李嘉琦,陈华,张伟,等.非透视下三维可视化技术与二维透视在不稳定型骨盆骨折复位中的应用效果比较[J].中国修复重建外科杂志,2023,37(2):129-135.
[3] 徐昕,周日,彭波,等.不稳定型骨盆骨折矢状面旋转移位的研究[J].中华实验外科杂志,2023,40(1):21.
[4] 马腾,魏代好,寇涛,等.改良Galveston技术结合3D打印治疗垂直不稳定骨盆骨折的效果[J].宁夏医科大学学报,2022,44(3):286-290.
[5] 吴国华,李悦,陈铎,等.数字化技术辅助Stoppa入路手术治疗髋臼骨折合并骶骨骨折[J].临床骨科杂志,2021,24(6):848-852.
[6] 刘冰川,孙川,侯国进,等.3D打印技术的临床应用:基于“精准骨科”的四肢骨缺损重建[J].中国微创外科杂志,2021,21(4):303-308.
[7] 张世民,李海丰,黄秩刚.骨折分类与功能评定[M].北京:人民军医出版社,2008.330.
[8] 齐红哲,张伟,李嘉琦,等.切开复位与闭合复位内固定治疗不稳定型骨盆骨折长期预后的多中心队列研究[J].中华创伤骨科杂志,2023,25(6):485-490.
[9] 林建东,黎创立,贾兆锋,等.骨盆骨折微创治疗的研究进展[J].中国骨与关节杂志,2021,10(9):665-668.
[10] 范士洁,赵滨,陈洪强.3D打印技术辅助手术治疗髋臼骨折初步体会[J].贵州医药,2020,44(5):762-763.
[11] 鲁顺立,吕豹,张宁.CT三维重建技术应用于骶髂关节前方钢板治疗不稳定性骨盆骨折的疗效观察[J].临床外科杂志,2023,31(4):317-320.
[12] 李国梁,李鹏,王旭洋,等.3D打印体外导板经皮空心钉固定治疗骨盆骨折5例[J].生物骨科材料与临床研究,2021,18(5):91-93.
[13] 鲁顺立,邢丽娜,许艳峰,等.3D打印辅助腹直肌旁切口精准微创治疗骨盆骨折临床效果观察[J].临床误诊误治,2020,33(11):75-79.