中国组织工程研究 ›› 2010, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (52): 9845-9848.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-8225.2010. 52.039

• 骨与关节临床实践 clinical practice of the bone and joint • 上一篇    下一篇

动力髋螺钉、Gamma钉、外固定架3种固定物治疗老年股骨转子间骨折

唐  克,段雄波   

  1. 新乐市医院,河北省新乐市   050700
  • 出版日期:2010-12-24 发布日期:2010-12-24
  • 作者简介:唐克,男,1973年生,河北省新乐市人,汉族,1998年张家口医学院毕业,主治医师,主要从事骨科研究。 Tangke199@sina.com

Elderly intertrochanteric fractures treatment using dynamic hip screw, Gamma nail and external fixation frisket

Tang Ke, Duan Xiong-bo   

  1. Xinle Hospital, Xinle 050700, Hebei Province, China
  • Online:2010-12-24 Published:2010-12-24
  • About author:Tang Ke, Chief physician, Xinle Hospital, Xinle 050700, Hebei Province, China Tangke199@sina.com

摘要:

背景:临床常用动力髋螺钉、Gamma钉、外固定架治疗老年股骨转子间骨折,但如何选择尚没有一个标准可供参考。
目的:比较动力髋螺钉、Gamma钉、外固定架3种内固定物治疗老年股骨转子间骨折的效果。
方法:对168例老年股骨转子间骨折分别采用动力髋螺钉内固定53例,Gamma钉内固定58例,外固定架57例,比较3组手术时间、出血量、骨折愈合时间和术后并发症,观察术后关节功能。
结果与结论:术后随访6~35个月。Gamma钉组平均手术时间99.11 min,长于动力髋螺钉组和外固定架组(P < 0.05),外固定架组时间最短(P < 0.05)。动力髋螺钉组出血量最多,外固定支架组最少,3组比较差异有显著性意义(P < 0.05)。外固定架组的并发症发生率明显高于动力髋螺钉组和Gamma钉组。骨折愈合时间及髋关节功能优良率3组比较差异无显著性意义(P > 0.05)。提示动力髋螺钉、Gamma钉及外固定架是治疗老年股骨转子间骨折的有效方法,各有优缺点,只要适应证掌握得当,根据病情合理选择固定物均能取得满意疗效。

关键词: 股骨转子间骨折, 动力髋螺钉, Gamma钉, 外固定架, 老年人

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Dynamic hip screw (DHS), Gamma nail and external fixation frisket are widely applied to treat elderly intertrochanteric fractures, but there are no relevant criteria available in the clinical selection.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the therapeutic effects of DHS, Gamma nail and external fixation frisket in treatment of elderly intertrochanteric fractures.
METHODS: 168 elderly patients with intertrochanteric fractures were divided into three groups, respectively treated with DHS (n=53), Gamma nail (n=58), and external fixation (n=57). The operative time, blood loss, fracture healing time, and postoperative complications were compared, and joint function after operation was observed. 
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The patients were followed up for 6-35 months. The mean operative time was 99.11 minutes in Gamma nail group, significantly longer than DHS and external fixation groups (P < 0.05). The amount of blood loss in DHS group was most, followed by Gamma nail, and then external fixation group (P < 0.05). The incidence rate of complications in external fixation group was significantly greater than the other groups. There were no differences in fracture healing time or hip joint function recovery (P > 0.05). DHS, Gamma nail and external fixation are effective methods for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. Each method has its own advantages and disadvantages. It can achieve satisfactory results with a reasonable choice for the state of illness.

中图分类号: