期刊文献+

锁定钢板与髓内钉治疗股骨远端骨折的临床对比分析 被引量:25

Clinical Comparative Analysis of Locking Compression Plate and Intramedullary Nailing in Treatment of Distal Femoral Fracture
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:对比分析锁定钢板内固定和逆行交锁髓内钉治疗股骨远端骨折的临床疗效。方法:将符合标准的85例股骨远端骨折患者随机分成观察组(47例)和对照组(38例),观察组采用锁定钢板内固定治疗,对照组逆行交锁髓内钉治疗,评价其疗效差异。结果:观察组在膝关节功能指标评分、并发症发生率以及预后疗效等方面均明显优于对照组(P<0.05)。结论:锁定钢板内固定治疗股骨下段骨折具有疗效满意、并发症少,安全可靠等优点,值得临床推广。 To compare clinical efficacy of locking compression plate fixation and intramedul- lary nailing in treatment of distal femoral fracture. Method: 85 patients were randomly divided into observed group (47 cases } and control group (38 cases }, patients in control group received intramedullary nailing treatment, while others received locking compression plate fixation treatment, and compared the curative effect between two groups. Result: The knee joint function index score, complication rate and prognosis of efficacy in observed group were significantly better than those in the control group (P〈0.05). Conclusion: The treatment of distal femoral fracture with locking compression plate fixation received a satisfactory outcome with few complications, safe and reliable and it was worthy to be popularized.
出处 《河北医学》 CAS 2013年第2期177-180,共4页 Hebei Medicine
关键词 股骨远端骨折折 锁定钢板 逆行交锁髓内钉 Distal femoral fracture Locking compression plate fixation Intramedullary nailing
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

二级参考文献20

  • 1赵玉峰,李起鸿,顾祖超,王爱民.点式接触动力加压接骨板与动力加压钢板固定后板下的骨质变化[J].中华骨科杂志,2005,25(1):25-29. 被引量:15
  • 2Weight M, Collinge C. Early results of the less invasive stabilization system for mechanically unstable fractures of the distal femur (AO/OTA types A2, A3, C2, and C3). J Orthop Trauma, 2004, 18(8): 503-508.
  • 3Miclau T, Martin RE. The evolution of modern plate osteosynthesis. Injury, 1997, 28 Suppl 1: A3-6.
  • 4Ghazavi MT, Pritzker KP, Davis AM, et al. Fresh osteochondrat allografts for post-traumatic osteochondral defects of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg(Br), 1997, 79(6):1008-1013.
  • 5Sanders R, Swiontkowski M, Rosen H, et al. Double-plating of comminuted, unstable fractures of the distal part of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg(Am), 1991, 73(3): 341-346.
  • 6Kolb W, Guhlmann H, Windisch C, et al. Fixation of distal femoral fractures with the Less Invasive Stabilization System: a minimally.invasive treatment with locked fixed-angle screws. J Trauma, 2008, 65(6):1425-1434.
  • 7Kayali C, Agus H, Turgut A. Successful results of minimally invasive surgery for comminuted supracondylar femoral fractures with LISS: comparative study of multiply injured and isolated femoral fractures. J Orthop Sci, 2007, 12(5): 458-465.
  • 8Schutz M, Muller M, Regazzoni P, et al. Use of the less invasive stabilization system (LISS) in patients with distal femoral (AO33) fractures: a prospective muhicenter study. Arch Ortbop Trauma Surg, 2005, 125(2):102-108.
  • 9Phisitkul P, McKinley TO, Nepola JV, et al. Complications of locking plate fixation in complex proximal tibia injuries. J Orthop Trauma, 2007, 21(2): 83-91.
  • 10Georgiadis GM, Gove NK, Smith AD, et al. Removal of the less invasive stabilization system. J Ortbop Trauma, 2004, 18 (8): 562- 564.

共引文献77

同被引文献202

引证文献25

二级引证文献94

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部