中国组织工程研究

中国组织工程研究 ›› 2011, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (48): 9100-9103.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-8225.2011.48.043

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

不同材料动力髋螺钉置入治疗股骨转子间骨折的生物相容性比较

程煜方，魏忠民，张克良，李子熙   

  1. 华中科技大学同济医学院附属普爱医院骨科，湖北省武汉市430034
  • 收稿日期:2011-08-15 修回日期:2011-10-15 出版日期:2011-11-26 发布日期:2011-11-26
  • 通讯作者: 魏忠民，主任医师，华中科技大学同济医学院附属普爱医院骨科，湖北省武汉市 430034
  • 作者简介:程煜方，男，1970年生，湖北省汉川市人，汉族，1992年华中科技大学同济医学院毕业，主治医师，主要从事四肢与脊柱的创伤研究。 wangna0809@126.com

Biocompatibility comparison between different dynamic hip screws for femoral intertrochanteric fractures

Chen Yu-fang, Wei Zhong-min, Zhang Ke-liang, Li Zi-xi   

  1. Department of Orthopedics, Puai Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan  430034, Hubei Province, China
  • Received:2011-08-15 Revised:2011-10-15 Online:2011-11-26 Published:2011-11-26
  • Contact: Wei Zhong-min, Chief physician, Department of Orthopedics, Puai Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430034, Hubei Province, China
  • About author:Cheng Yu-fang, Attending physician, Department of Orthopedics, Puai Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430034, Hubei Province, China wangna0809@126.com

PDF

645

被引次数

9

摘要：

背景：动力髋螺钉置入治疗股骨转子间骨折选择不锈钢还是钛合金材料一直无明确定论。
目的：比较不锈钢动力髋螺钉和钛合金动力髋螺钉置入治疗股骨转子间骨折的生物相容性。
方法：2003-07/2009-10收治股骨转子间骨折86例，分别用不锈钢动力髋螺钉和钛合金动力髋螺钉治疗各43例，两组患者在性别、年龄、致伤原因、骨折分型等方面基本相同，不锈钢动力髋螺采用00Cr18Ni14Mo3不锈钢，钛合金动力髋螺钉采用Ti6A14V钛合金，比较两组固定后的并发症、髋关节功能的恢复情况，取钉时大体观察植入物周围软组织炎症反应、增生及纤维囊壁情况。
结果与结论：两组固定后并发症、髋关节功能的恢复方面差异无显著性意义，但在取钉时大体观察内固定周围软组织炎症反应、增生及纤维囊壁情况，不锈钢动力髋螺钉组明显多于钛合金动力髋螺钉组(P < 0.01)。提示钛合金动力髋螺钉的生物相容性好于不锈钢动力髋螺钉，可作为永久性置入材料。

关键词: 不锈钢, 钛合金, 动力髋螺钉, 股骨转子间骨折, 生物相容性

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: There has been no clear conclusion about the better selection of materials with good biocompatibility between stainless steel and titanium alloy dynamic hip screw for the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture of the femur.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the biocompatibility between stainless steel and titanium alloy dynamic hip screw implantation in the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture of femur.
METHODS: A total of 86 patients with femoral intertrochanteric fracture were selected from July 2003 to October 2009, and treated with stainless steel dynamic hip screw (n=43) and titanium alloy dynamic hip screw (n=43). Two groups were matched in terms of gender, age, cause of injury, and fracture type. 00Cr18Ni14Mo3 stainless steel was used in stainless steel dynamic hip screw group and Ti6A14V titanium alloy in the titanium alloy dynamic hip screw group. Differences in postoperative complications and recovery of hip joint function were compared between two groups, and soft tissue inflammatory reaction, hyperplasia and fibrous capsule wall surrounding the implants were observed.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences between two groups in the postoperative complications and recovery of hip joint function, but the stainless steel dynamic hip screw group was worse than the titanium alloy dynamic hip screw group in the soft tissue inflammatory reaction, hyperplasia and fibrous capsule wall surrounding the implants when removing the screws (P < 0.01). Results indicated that biocompatibility of titanium alloy dynamic hip screw was better than the stainless steel dynamic hip screw and can be used as a permanent implant material.

中图分类号: