摘要
目的:研究SD大鼠两种胫骨骨缺损模型构建的差异,为建立标准、有效骨缺损模型提供参考。方法:将60只SD大鼠随机分为克氏针组、双层钢锯组,克氏针组用低速电钻造成直径为1mm的圆孔单皮质骨缺损(此为钻孔法);双层钢锯组用钢锯造成宽度为1mm、深至见髓腔出血的骨缺损(此法为锯开法)。对两组平均造模耗时、术后肿胀情况、造模成功率、畸形愈合率、行走站立活动评分进行比较。结果:克氏针组各项观察指标均优于双层钢锯组,且术后24h肿胀程度及术后1周、2周行走站立活动评分差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:钻孔法和锯开法均可成功构建胫骨骨缺损模型,钻孔法操作简便、高效且创伤小,是理想的胫骨缺损模型制备方法。
Objective：To compare the differences between two ways of constructing tibial defect models in SD rats, and provide a reference for establishing a standard, effective model of tibial bone defects. Methods： 60 SD rats were divided randomly into a kirschner wire model group and a double hacksaws model group. Rats in the kirschner wire model group were treated with low-speed bone drill and made an I mm hole on tibial plat- eau （named drilling method）; while rats in the double hacksaws model group were treated with double hacksaws and made an 1 mm hole deep to the medullary canal （named sawing method）. The average modeling time, postoperative swelling, successful rate of model establishment, malunion rate, standing and walking activity score between two groups were compared. Results： The observed indexes of the kirschner wire model group were better than those in the double hacksaws model group. The postoperative swelling at 24h and the score of standing and walking activity at 1 week, 2 weeks after operation had a statistically significant difference （ P〈0.05）. Conclusion： Drilling method and sawing method could be used to construct tibial defect models. But drilling method has the advantages of simple manipulation, effectivity and minimal trauma, which is a more ideal way to construct tibial defect models.
作者
刘玉召
罗清龙
程志刚
唐良华
杨伟瑞
王睿翔
LIU Yu-zhao LUO Qing-long CHENG Zhi-gang TANG Liang-hua YANG Wei-rui WANG Rui-xiang(The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guiyang University of CM, Guiyang 550003, Guizhou Chin)
出处
《贵阳中医学院学报》
2017年第5期19-22,共4页
Journal of Guiyang University of Chinese Medicine
基金
2015年度贵州省科技厅课题
项目编号:黔科合LH字[20157257]号
