中国组织工程研究

中国组织工程研究 ›› 2012, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (35): 6525-6529.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2012.35.013

• 人工假体 artificial prosthesis • 上一篇    下一篇

假体置换、植入物内固定及切除治疗Mason Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折的比较

陈佳佳，王黎明，赵 磊，蒋纯志，桂鉴超，王钢锐   

  1. 南京医科大学附属南京医院，南京市第一医院骨科中心，江苏省南京市 210006
  • 收稿日期:2012-05-09 修回日期:2012-05-28 出版日期:2012-08-26 发布日期:2012-08-26
  • 通讯作者: 王黎明，博士，教授，博士生导师，南京医科大学附属南京医院，南京市第一医院骨科中心，江苏省南京市 210006 lingmingwang99@yahoo.com
  • 作者简介:陈佳佳★，男，1987年生，江苏省连云港市人，南京医科大学在读硕士，主要从事人工关节的研究。 cjj05170418@126.com

Comparison among radial head resection, internal fixation and prosthesis replacement for the treatment of Mason type-Ⅲ radial head fracture

Chen Jia-jia, Wang Li-ming, Zhao Lei, Jiang Chun-zhi, Gui Jian-chao, Wang Gang-rui   

  1. Department of Orthopedics, Affiliated Nanjing First Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210006, Jiangsu Province, China
  • Received:2012-05-09 Revised:2012-05-28 Online:2012-08-26 Published:2012-08-26
  • Contact: Wang Li-ming, M.D., Professor, Doctoral supervisor, Department of Orthopedics, Affiliated Nanjing First Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210006, Jiangsu Province, China lingmingwang99@yahoo.com
  • About author:Chen Jia-jia★, Studying for master’s degree, Department of Orthopedics, Affiliated Nanjing First Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210006, Jiangsu Province, China cjj05170418@126.com

PDF

424

被引次数

21

摘要：

背景：目前治疗Mason Ⅲ型骨折的方法各有利弊，在治疗方案选择上存在较多争议。
目的：对比桡骨头假体置换、切开复位内固定与桡骨头切除治疗Mason Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折的疗效，探讨治疗Mason Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折更合理、更有效的方法。
方法：回顾性分析33例Mason Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折患者的临床资料，根据治疗方法将患者分为切除组11例、内固定组11例和置换组11例。通过治疗后随访评估3种方法的效果。
结果与结论：所有患者随访12~53个月，平均20个月，均获得较满意的肘关节功能。末次随访时，3组患者在肘关节疼痛、屈伸活动度方面差异无显著性意义(P > 0.05)。但前臂旋转活动度、X射线观察提携角和桡骨移位以及Broberg和Morrey肘关节功能评分在3组间差异有显著性意义，且置换组优于内固定组，内固定组优于切除组。提示，与桡骨头切除、切开复位内固定相比，桡骨头假体置换治疗Mason Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折可获得更好的肘关节功能。

关键词: Mason Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折, 切除, 内固定, 假体置换, 疗效比较, 植入物

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Looking at the current three surgical programs for Mason type-Ⅲ radial head fracture, each of them has advantages and disadvantages. There is still some controversy in the choice of surgical program.
OBJECTIVE: To compare curative effect of radial head resection, internal fixation and radial head prosthesis replacement for the treatment of Mason type-Ⅲ radial head fracture, and to explore more reasonable and more effective treatment methods.
METHODS: The clinical data of 33 patients with Mason type-Ⅲ radial head fracture were analyzed, according to different surgical techniques, and the patients were divided into resection group (n=11), internal fixation group (n=11) and replacement group (n=11). The results of the three groups were assessed by statistical analysis after follow-up.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: All patients were followed-up for 12 to 53 months with an average of 20 months. The patients of three groups were all satisfied with the elbow joint function. There was no significant difference in the pain visual analogue scale score and flexion and extension activity of the elbow among three groups (P > 0.05), but there was significant difference in forearm rotation angle, carrying angle observed by X-ray, shift of radius and Broberg and Morrey elbow scores among three groups, and the indicators in replacement group were better than those in the internal fixation group, and the internal fixation group was better than the resection group. It indicates that the radial head prosthesis replacement for the treatment of Mason type-Ⅲ radial head fracture can get better elbow joint dysfunction compared with radial head resection and internal fixation.

中图分类号: