《中国期刊全文数据库》收录期刊
《中国核心期刊(遴选)数据库》收录期刊
《中文科技期刊数据库》收录期刊
论著

胫骨远端锁定加压钢板与解剖型钢板内固定治疗Pilon骨折疗效比较

  • 董文彪 ,
  • 龙长新 ,
  • 黄继华 ,
  • 田辛
展开
  • 恭城瑶族自治县中医医院骨伤科,广西 桂林 542500
董文彪(1986—),男,大学本科,主治医师,从事临床骨伤科的工作;电子信箱:dwenbiao5425@163.com

收稿日期: 2022-08-22

  网络出版日期: 2023-05-26

Comparison of effects of distal tibial locking compression plate and anatomical plate internal fixation on Pilon fractures

  • DONG Wenbiao ,
  • LONG Changxin ,
  • HUANG Jihua ,
  • TIAN Xin
Expand
  • Department of Orthopedics, Gongcheng Yao Autonomous County Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Guilin 542500, Guangxi, China

Received date: 2022-08-22

  Online published: 2023-05-26

摘要

目的 对比分析胫骨远端锁定加压钢板(locking compression plate, LCP)与解剖型钢板内固定治疗Pilon骨折疗效。方法 选取2018年1月—2020年6月期间收治的71例Pilon骨折患者。按照随机数字表法分为两组:研究组36例采用胫骨远端LCP治疗,对照组35例采用解剖型钢板内固定治疗。对比两组临床指标、Mazur评分优良率及并发症发生率。结果 研究组手术时间、手术切口长度、住院时间、骨折愈合时间均短于对照组(P<0.05);随访12个月,研究组患者Mazur评分优良率97.22%明显高于对照组77.14%(P<0.05);研究组并发症发生率2.78%明显低于对照组25.71%(P<0.05)。结论 胫骨远端LCP治疗Pilon骨折可显著促进骨折复位、愈合及踝关节功能恢复,且并发症发生率低,值得临床推广。

本文引用格式

董文彪 , 龙长新 , 黄继华 , 田辛 . 胫骨远端锁定加压钢板与解剖型钢板内固定治疗Pilon骨折疗效比较[J]. 外科研究与新技术(中英文), 2023 , 12(1) : 33 -35 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-378X.2023.01.009

Abstract

Objective To compare and analyze the effects of distal tibial locking compression plate (LCP) and anatomical plate internal fixation on Pilon fractures. Methods A total of 71 patients with Pilon fractures admitted to the hospital from January 2018 to June 2020 were selected. According to the method of random number table, 36 patients in the study group were treated with LCP of distal tibia, and 35 patients in the control group were treated with anatomical plate internal fixation.The clinical indexes, the excellent and good rate of Mazur score, and the incidence rate of complications were compared between the two groups. Results The operation time, surgical incision length, hospital stay, and fracture healing time in the study group were all shorter than those in the control group (P<0.05). After 12 months of follow-up, the excellent and good rate of Mazur score in the study group was 97.22%, which was significantly higher than that in the control group, 77.14% (P<0.05). The incidence rate of complications in the study group was 2.78%, which was significantly lower than that in the control group, 25.71% (P<0.05). Conclusion Distal tibial LCP in the treatment of Pilon fractures can significantly promote fracture reduction, healing, and ankle function recovery, with a low complication rate, which is worthy of clinical promotion.

参考文献

[1] 孙庆华. Pilon骨折治疗多元化分析与进展[J].华北理工大学学报(医学版),2021,23(3):248-252.
[2] 高懋峰,刘乃澄,施卫东,等.后外侧入路支撑钢板内固定治疗后Pilon骨折的疗效分析[[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2018:33(8):817-819.
[3] 王新建. 胫骨远端锁定加压钢板内固定术对Pilon骨折的疗效[J].河南医学研究,2020,29(17):3140-3142.
[4] 田伟. 积水潭实用骨科学[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2008:487-488.
[5] Zhang J, Ebraheim N, Li M, et al.External fixation using femoral less invasive stabilization system plate in tibial proximal metaphyseal fracture[J]. Clin Orthop Surg, 2015, 7(1): 8-14.
[6] 徐继胜,张传林.探讨闭合复位外固定架牵张固定治疗指骨Pilon骨折的疗效[J].外科研究与新技术,2016,5(2):105-107.
[7] 李峰,庞争取,张修春.锁定加压钢板与解剖钢板内固定治疗闭合性胫骨Pilon 骨折疗效及对下肢功能康复的影响[J].临床外科杂志,2018,26(5):377-381.
[8] 尚志平. 锁定加压钢板与解剖钢板内固定治疗闭合性胫骨Pilon骨折对比[J].实用中西医结合临床,2019,19(9):116-118.
[9] 陈希鹏,陈世东,赵晶阳.微创经皮内固定术结合锁定加压钢板治疗胫骨远端骨折的治疗优良率及并发症研究[J].河北医学,2020,26(11):1829-1833.
[10] 林德涛,代风波,林元西,等.锁定加压钢板内固定对Pilon骨折患者骨折复位及肢体功能的影响[J].浙江创伤外科,2021,26(5):890-892.
[11] 李方,白鸽.锁定加压钢板与解剖钢板内固定对Pilon骨折患者骨折复位及肢体功能的影响比较[J].临床医学研究与实践,2021,6(6):68-69.
[12] 郝虎萍,李建平,催兴杰,等.锁定加压钢板与解剖钢板内固定治疗Pilon骨折临床疗效比较[J].海南医学,2019,30(15):1934-1936.
[13] 汪胜,左才红.锁定加压钢板与解剖钢板内固定治疗胫骨Pilon骨折的疗效比较[J].现代仪器与医疗,2017,23(5):112-113.
文章导航

/