[1]李全辉,朱 鉴,卢 浩,等.保守与手术治疗老年性锁骨中段移位骨折的疗效比较[J].医学信息,2019,32(19):109-111.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.19.034]
　LI Quan-hui,ZHU Jian,LU Hao,et al.Comparison of Conservative Treatment and Surgical Treatment of Senile Mid-clavicular Displaced Fracture[J].Journal of Medical Information,2019,32(19):109-111.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.19.034]
点击复制

保守与手术治疗老年性锁骨中段移位骨折的疗效比较()
分享到：

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
32卷
期数:
2019年19期
页码:
109-111
栏目:
临床研究
出版日期:
2019-10-01

文章信息/Info

Title:
Comparison of Conservative Treatment and Surgical Treatment of Senile Mid-clavicular Displaced Fracture
文章编号:
1006-1959（2019）19-0109-03
作者:
李全辉; 朱 鉴; 卢 浩; 秦 蕾
（安徽省颍上县人民医院骨三科，安徽 颍上 236200）
Author(s):
LI Quan-hui; ZHU Jian; LU Hao; QIN Lei
(Department of Orthopaedics,Subject Three,Yingshang County People's Hospital,Yingshang 236200,Anhui,China)
关键词:
锁骨中断移位骨折; 保守治疗; 手术治疗; 肩关节功能
Keywords:
Clavicle interrupted fracture; Conservative treatment; Surgical treatment; Shoulder function
分类号:
R687.3
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.19.034
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 比较保守与手术治疗老年性锁骨中段移位骨折的临床疗效。方法 选取2013年1月~2018年12月我院收治老年性锁骨中段移位骨折患者72例，根据治疗方式不同分成保守组和手术组，各36例。保守组采用“8”字绷带或屈肘位予三角巾悬吊患侧胸前固定，手术组采用长锁定钢板桥接固定，比较两组治疗总有效率、并发症发生率及治疗前后肩关节功能评分。结果 手术组治疗优良率为100.00%，高于保守组的69.44%，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。手术组并发症总发生率为8.33%，低于保守组的30.56%，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。治疗前及治疗后6个月两组肩关节功能评分比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；治疗后1、3个月,手术组肩关节功能评分高于保守组[（71.53±6.38）分vs（59.65±3.71）分]、[（87.64±3.36）分vs（75.22±7.23）分]，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。手术组骨折愈合时间为（8.16±2.38）周，优于保守组的（10.69±3.56）周。结论 长锁定接骨板桥接固定治疗老年锁骨中段移位骨折，可提供牢靠的固定，减少并发症及促进肩关节功能恢复，是一种理想的治疗方案。
Abstract:
Objective The clinical efficacy of conservative and surgical treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures.Methods From January 2013 to December 2018, 72 patients with displaced midshaft clavicle fractures were enrolled in our hospital. According to different treatment methods, they were divided into conservative group and operation group, 36 cases each. In the conservative group, the 8-fold bandage or flexion elbow was used to suspend the affected side of the chest. The operation group was fixed with a long locking plate. The excellent and good rate, the incidence of complications and the shoulder function score before and after treatment were compared.Results The excellent and good rate was 100.00% in the surgical group, which was higher than that in the conservative group 69.44%,the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The total incidence of complications in the operation group was 8.33%, which was lower than that in the conservative group 30.56%,the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in shoulder function score between the two groups before treatment and 6 months after treatment (P>0.05). After 1 and 3 months of treatment, the shoulder function score of the operation group was higher than that of the conservative group[(71.53±6.38)score vs (59.65±3.71)score]、[(87.64±3.36)score vs (75.22±7.23)score],the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).The fracture healing time in the operation group was (8.16±2.38) weeks, which was early than that in the conservative group (10.69±3.56) weeks, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusion Long-locked plate fixation for the treatment of displaced mid-clavicular fractures can provide a firm fixation, reduce complications and promote shoulder function recovery. It is an ideal treatment plan.

参考文献/References:

[1]徐强,蔡安烈,张锡平,等.保留与切断锁骨上皮神经治疗锁骨骨折的比较[J].中国矫形外科杂志,2018,4(26):324-327. [2]张庆甲.重建钢板内固定手术治疗锁骨骨折临床疗效观察[J].系统医学,2019,1(4):70-72. [3]吴克俭.评述保守治疗和手术治疗老年锁骨中段移位骨折的疗效[J].中华肩肘外科电子杂志,2017,5(4):246. [4]卢耀开,王锡雄.老年性锁骨中段骨折保守治疗与手术治疗的效果对比[J].中国实用医药,2016,34(11):33-35. [5]黄其龙,王克辛,柯勇平,等.改良锁定钢板与传统锁定钢板内固定治疗锁骨中段骨折的疗效比较[J].中国骨与关节损伤志,2018,11(33):1193-1195. [6]李浪,陈龙,邢飞,等.手术与非手术治疗锁骨中段骨折的Meta分析[J].中国循证医学杂志,2018,5(18):489-497. [7]孙太存,徐晓峰,崔学文.长锁定接骨板桥接固定治疗锁骨中段移位骨折[J].中国修复重建外科杂志,2013,6(27):666-669. [8]曹拓.手术与非手术治疗成人锁骨中段移位性骨折比较[J].现代临床医学,2018,3(44):203-205. [9]吴智旺.应用解剖钢板内固定手术治疗锁骨中段粉碎性骨折的疗效及术后并发症发生率分析[J].现代医学与健康研究,2018,16(2):124-125. [10]张弛,纪方.保守治疗和手术治疗老年锁骨中段移位骨折的疗效比较[J].中华肩肘外科电子杂志,2017,4(5):247-256.

相似文献/References:

[1]欧阳如刚.微创与保守治疗腰间盘突出的效果分析[J].医学信息,2018,31(04):179.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2018.04.068]
　OUYANG-Rugang.Analysis of the Effect of Minimally Invasive and Conservative Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation[J].Journal of Medical Information,2018,31(19):179.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2018.04.068]
[2]蒙泽振,魏成建,王来毅,等.保守治疗桡骨远端骨折后再移位的影响因素研究[J].医学信息,2022,35(10):87.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.10.021]
　MENG Ze-zhen,WEI Cheng-jian,WANG Lai-yi,et al.Study on the Influencing Factors of Redisplacement After Conservative Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures[J].Journal of Medical Information,2022,35(19):87.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.10.021]
[3]武 杰.急性胃出血患者的急诊治疗及症状转归分析[J].医学信息,2019,32(18):96.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.18.031]
　WU Jie.Emergency Treatment and Symptom Outcome Analysis of Patients with Acute Gastric Hemorrhage[J].Journal of Medical Information,2019,32(19):96.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.18.031]
[4]张 帆.急性阑尾炎保守与手术治疗的效果比较[J].医学信息,2019,32(16):100.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.16.031]
　ZHANG Fan.Comparison of the Effects of Conservative Appendicitis and Surgical Treatment[J].Journal of Medical Information,2019,32(19):100.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.16.031]

更新日期/Last Update: 2019-10-01