Suppr超能文献

不稳定型股骨粗隆间骨折的治疗选择:螺钉或股骨近端螺旋髓内钉。

Treatment options for unstable trochanteric fractures: Screw or helical proxima femoral nail.

作者信息

Bajpai Jeetendra, Maheshwari Rajesh, Bajpai Akansha, Saini Sumit

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics, Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences, HIHT University, Jollygrant, Dehradun 248140, India.

出版信息

Chin J Traumatol. 2015;18(6):342-6. doi: 10.1016/j.cjtee.2015.03.006.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare treatment outcome of screw proximal femoral nail (PFN) system with that of a helical PFN.

METHODS

The study included 77 patients with closed unstable intertrochanteric fracture classified as AO 31A2&31A3, between June 2008 to August 2011. Inclusion criteria were: all mature skeletons above 50 years of age; closed unstable trochanteric fracture classified as AO 31A2&A3. Exclusion criteria were: immature skeleton, pathological fracture of any cause other than osteoporosis, inability to walk inde- pendently prior to injury. Patients were randomized to 2 treatment groups based on admission sequence. Forty patients were treated with screw PFN and thirty seven were treated with helical PFN.

RESULTS

Both groups were similar in respect of time of surgery, blood loss and functional assessment and duration of hospitalization. In screw PFN group 2 patients had superficial wound infection, 1 patient had persistent hip pain and 1 patient had shortening>1 cm but<2 cm, while in helical PFN group 1 patient had superficial wound infection.

CONCLUSION

Both screw and helical PFN are very effective implants in osteoporotic and unstable trochanteric fractures even in Indian patients where the bones are narrow and neck diameter is small. It is an implant of choice for osteoporotic and unstable trochanteric fractures.

摘要

目的

比较股骨近端螺旋刀片抗旋髓内钉(PFN)系统与螺旋型PFN的治疗效果。

方法

本研究纳入了2008年6月至2011年8月期间77例闭合性不稳定型股骨粗隆间骨折患者,骨折按AO 31A2和31A3分类。纳入标准为:所有年龄在50岁以上的成熟骨骼;闭合性不稳定型股骨粗隆间骨折,按AO 31A2和A3分类。排除标准为:骨骼未成熟、除骨质疏松症外任何原因导致的病理性骨折、受伤前无法独立行走。根据入院顺序将患者随机分为2个治疗组。40例患者接受了带锁PFN治疗,37例患者接受了螺旋型PFN治疗。

结果

两组在手术时间、失血量、功能评估和住院时间方面相似。带锁PFN组有2例患者发生表浅伤口感染,1例患者持续存在髋部疼痛,1例患者出现短缩>1 cm但<2 cm;而螺旋型PFN组有1例患者发生表浅伤口感染。

结论

对于骨质疏松性不稳定型股骨粗隆间骨折,无论是带锁PFN还是螺旋型PFN,即使在印度患者(其骨骼较窄且股骨颈直径较小)中都是非常有效的植入物。它是骨质疏松性不稳定型股骨粗隆间骨折的首选植入物。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验