[1]吴志忠,李生国,王 玺,等.PFLP与PFNA内固定治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折疗效分析[J].医学信息,2018,31(15):82-85.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2018.15.025]
　WU Zhi-zhong,LI Sheng-guo,WANG Xi,et al.PFLP and PFNA Internal Fixation for the Treatment of Intertrochanteric Fractures in the Elderly[J].Journal of Medical Information,2018,31(15):82-85.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2018.15.025]
点击复制

PFLP与PFNA内固定治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折疗效分析()
分享到：

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
31卷
期数:
2018年15期
页码:
82-85
栏目:
临床研究
出版日期:
2018-08-01

文章信息/Info

Title:
PFLP and PFNA Internal Fixation for the Treatment of Intertrochanteric Fractures in the Elderly
文章编号:
1006-1959（2018）15-0082-04
作者:
吴志忠; 李生国; 王 玺; 朱 辉; 黄国平; 任作玉
武威市中医院骨科，甘肃 武威 733000
Author(s):
WU Zhi-zhong; LI Sheng-guo; WANG Xi; ZHU Hui; HUANG Guo-ping; REN Zuo-yu
Department of Orthopedics,Wuwei Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine,Wuwei 733000,Gansu,China
关键词:
老年股骨粗隆间骨折; PFLP; PFNA; 内固定
Keywords:
Key words：Intertrochanteric fracture in the elderly; PFLP; PFNA; Internal fixation
分类号:
R687.3
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2018.15.025
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 探讨股骨近端解剖型锁定板与股骨近端髓内钉内固定治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效。方法 回顾性分析自2015年5月~2017年6月我院诊治的70列老年股骨粗隆间骨折，按就诊的先后顺序随机分为两组，采用PFLP内固定32例，采用PFNA内固定38例。所有患者记录骨折愈合时间、术后并发症，并行Harris髋关节功能评分。结果 所有患者获得随访6～12个月。所有患者都获得骨性合愈，愈合时间3~6个月，平均5个月。PFNA组手术时间及术中出血量均少于PFLP组,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；两组骨折愈合时间、患肢完全负重时间、住院时间比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。PFNA组术后6周按髋关节功能Harris评分优良率89.47%，优于PFLP组87.50%，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论 PFNA内固定相比PFLP内固定优势略为明显，但两者都具有操作简单，复合生物力学固定原则，术后并发症少，疗效肯定的特点，临床上应根据骨折的具体情况与术者对固定方法的熟练程度灵活选择运用。
Abstract:
Abstract：Objective To compare the therapeutic effects of anatomical locking plate and proximal femoral nail in the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture in the elderly.Methods From May 2015 to June 2017,70 elderly intertrochanteric fracture of femur were analyzed retrospectively.According to the order of treatment, they were randomly divided into two groups:32 cases were treated with PFLP internal fixation,38 cases were treated with PFNA internal fixation.Fracture healing time,postoperative complications and Harris score of hip joint function were recorded in all patients.Results All patients were followed up for 6 to12 months.All patients achieved bony union.The healing time was 3 to 6 months,with an average of 5 months.The operative time and intraoperative blood loss in group PFNA were less than those in group PFLP,the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in fracture healing time,full weight-bearing time of the affected limb and length of stay between the two groups(P>0.05).The excellent and good rate of Harris score of hip joint function in PFNA group was 89.47%,which was superior to that in PFLP group 87.5%,the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Conclusion The advantages of PFNA internal fixation are more obvious than that of PFLP,but both have the characteristics of simple operation,complex biomechanical fixation principle,less postoperative complications and positive curative effect.According to the specific condition of fracture and the skillful degree of fixation,we should choose and use it flexibly.

参考文献/References:

[1]陶仕坤.不同方式治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的疗效对比分析[J].当代医学,2011,17(4):87-88.
[2]李玉春,陈英恒. PFNA与DHS内固定治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的疗效比较[J].临床医学工程，2014,2(21):203-204.
[3]王丙刚,刘娜,杨佐明,等.髓内固定与髓外固定治疗股骨粗隆下骨折疗效对比[J].实用骨科杂志,2015,21(12):1109-1113.
[4]关长勇,长青,彭伟,等.PFNA内固定与人工股骨头置换技术治疗高龄股骨粗隆间骨折治疗比较[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2013,28(2):110-120.
[5]张珺,褚鹏程.股骨粗隆骨折与人工股骨头置换术后脱位关联的初步研究[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2017,32(12):1285-1286.
[6]王齐超,王海蛟,何冰,张生.PFNA与LCP在治疗股骨粗隆间骨折中的实险学指标比较[J] .中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2017，32(12):1289-1291.
[7]朱成栋,朱乐银,乔高山,等.应用MIPPO技术LCP内固定治疗AO-A3型老年股骨粗隆间骨折的疗效分析[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2017,32(4):395-396.
[8]茹江英,丛宁,仓海斌,等.老年股骨粗隆间骨折PFNA内固定术后失效的翻修方法及效果分析[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2014,29(2):129-131.
[9]王益民,董启榕,韦兆祥.高龄股骨转子间骨折患者围手术期隐性失血的原因分析[[J].中华医学杂志，2014,34(5):351.
[10]谢超春,陈爱民.PFLP与InterTan内固定治疗股骨粗隆下骨折的疗效分析[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2017,32(3):258.
[11]高金华,王明洋,顾文浩,等.经皮撬拨复位PFNA内固定和股骨近段解剖锁定板内固定治疗老年不稳定股骨粗隆间骨折的疗效比较[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2017,32(6):619-620.
[12]简旭华,颜志坚,岑怡彪,等.老年外侧壁不完整型股骨粗隆间骨折PFNA与DHS内固定的疗效比较[J]. 中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2017,32(6):617-618.

更新日期/Last Update: 2018-08-01