髓内钉和微创钢板在肱骨干骨折内固定治疗中的应用效果对比

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (15)
Related Citation (10)

Download: PDF (0 KB) HTML (38 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of minimally invasive plating osteosynthesis and minimally intramedullary nailing in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures in order to find a safer and more effective therapeutic approach.Methods The clinical data of 72 patients with humeral shaft fractures from May 2013 to June 2015 in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed.The data were evenly divided into two groups in random.36 patients treated by minimally invasive plate for internal fixation were classified into the MIPO group,and the rest 36 patients treated by intramedullary nail were categorized into the MIN group.The operation time,intraoperative amount of bleeding,healing time of bone fracture,and occurrence of complications in the two groups were compared.Results The operation time in the MIN group was shorter than that in the MIPO group,and intraoperative amount of bleeding in the MIN group was less than that in the MIPO group,with statistical differences(P＜0.01).There were no significant difference in the healing time of bone fracture,score of shoulder and elbow joints improvement,or incidence of complications between the two groups(P＞0.05).Conclusion In the treatment of humeral shaft fractures,minimally intramedullary nailing is more efficient and can shorten the operation time,decrease the amount of bleeding,and reduce the risk of infection in comparison with those by minimally invasive plating osteosynthesis,which needs further exploration.

Key words： Humeral shaft fracture Minimally invasive technique Minimally invasive plating osteosynthesis Intramedullary nail

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	FAN Qi-zhu
	WU Ting
	HUANG Jun
	LI Xiu-qi

Cite this article:

FAN Qi-zhu,WU Ting,HUANG Jun, et al. Application effect comparison of intramedullary nail and minimally invasive plate in the treatment of humeral shaft fracture for internal fixation[J]. 中国当代医药, 2017, 24(7): 97-99.

URL:

http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/ OR http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/Y2017/V24/I7/97

[1]	曹烈虎，翁蔚宗，宋绍军，等.微创空心钉与切开复位钢板内固定治疗肱骨大结节骨折的疗效比较[J].中国修复重建外科杂志，2013，27（4）：418-422.
[2]	Lopez-Arevalo R，De Llano-Temboury AQ，Serrano-Montilla J，et al.Treatment of diaphyseal humeral fractures with the minimallyinvasivepercutaneousplate（MIPO）technique：a cadaveric study andclinical results[J].J Orthop Trauma，2011，25（5）：294-299.
[3]	朱砂.肱骨干骨折两种固定术疗效比较[J].当代医学，2011，17（23）：110-111.
[4]	赵益峰，王满宜.肱骨干骨折的治疗进展[J].中华创伤骨科杂志，2010，12（7）：973-975.
[5]	秦练，陈琦，周赤兵.带锁髓内钉和锁定钢板内固定治疗肱骨干骨折的疗效比较[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2013，28（S1）：50-51.
[6]	何小健，潘福根，周凯华，等.前侧入路与外侧入路微创钢板固定肱骨干骨折疗效比较[J].中国修复重建外科杂志，2014，28（4）：401-405.
[7]	Apivatthakakul T，Patiyasikan S，Luevitoonvechkit S.Danger zone for locking screw placement in minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis（MIPO）of humeral shaft fractures：a cadaveric study[J].Injury，2010，41（2）：169-172.
[8]	安智全，何小健，姜朝来，等.微创钢板内固定术与可膨胀髓内钉治疗肱骨干中段骨折的疗效比较[J].中国修复重建外科杂志，2010，24（12）：1413-1415.
[9]	Mahabier KC，Vogels LM，Punt BJ，et al.Humeral shaft fractures：retrospective results of non-operative and operative treatment of 186 patients[J].Injury，2013，44（4）：427-430.
[10]	毛汉兴，马菊花，孙华，等.前侧入路MIPO技术治疗肱骨中下段B、C型骨折的临床疗效分析[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2014，29（11）：1155-1156.
[11]	敖金荣，邹鹏.交锁髓内钉与锁定钢板治疗肱骨干骨折的临床对比研究[J].国际医药卫生导报，2012，18（18）：2734-2736.
[12]	Kobayashi M，Watanabe Y，Matsushita T.Early full range of shoulder and elbow motion is possible after minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis for humeral shaft fractures[J]. Orthop Trauma，2010，24（4）：212-216.
[13]	李险峰，闫鸿涛，张务友，等.螺旋状钢板微创治疗肱骨干骨折的外科技术[J].中外医学研究，2015，13（21）：109-110.
[14]	赵志明，舒衡生，万春友，等.可膨胀自锁型髓内钉治疗肱骨干骨折[J].中国矫形外科杂志，2009，17（20）：1534-1536.
[15]	An Z，Zeng B，He X，et al.Plating osteosynthesis of middistal humeral shaft fractures：minimally invasive versus conventional open reduction technique[J].Int Orthop，2010，34（1）：131-135.