摘要
目的探讨股骨近端髓内钉（PFN）与股骨锁定钢板（PFLP）固定治疗股骨转子下骨折的临床疗效。方法 68例股骨转子下骨折患者随机分为PFN组和PFLP组各34例,观察两组手术时间、骨折愈合时间、术中出血量情况、并发症。结果所有患者术后6个月均一期愈合,Ⅰ~Ⅱ型股骨转子下骨折：PFLP组手术时间少于PFN组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）,骨折愈合时间、术中出血量及Harris评分对比,两组差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）;Ⅲ-Ⅴ型股骨转子下骨折：PFN组术中出血量小于PFLP组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）,手术时间及骨折愈合时间、Harris评分对比,两组差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。结论对于Ⅰ~Ⅱ型股骨转子下骨折,PFN与PFLP具有相同临床疗效,而Ⅲ~Ⅴ型股骨转子下骨折,PFN更有优势。
Objective To explore the clinical efficacy of PFN and PFLP in treatment of femoral subtrochanterie fractures. Methods 68 cases of subtrochanteric fracture patients according fixed method were divided into PFN group and PFLP group every 34 cases,observed two groups of operation time, fracture healing time, amount of bleeding during operation. Results After operation, I - II subtroehanteric fracture： the operation time in PFLP group was less than that in PFN group （P〈0.05）, and the healing of the fractore bleeding volume and Harris score compared time, intraoperative, no significant difference between two groups（P〉0.05）; Ⅲ- V subtrochanteric fracture： in PFN group, the bleeding amount was less than PFLP group（P〈0.05）, the operation time and healing time of fracture, Harris score comparison, no significant difference between two groups（P〉0.05）.Conclusion For I - Ⅱ type fracture of the femur, PFN and PFLP have the same clinical efficacy, and Ⅲ- V subtrochanteric fracture, PFN has more advantages.
出处
《中国医药指南》
2014年第32期16-17,共2页
Guide of China Medicine
