胫骨远端骨折患者行锁定加压钢板和外固定架的实践与评估

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (16)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (0 KB) HTML (32 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To study the clinical efficacy of locking compression plate and external fixator in patients with distal tibialfractures,and to explore its clinical applicability.Methods Thirty-six patients with distal tibial fractures visited department of orthopaedics in our hospital from June 2012 to June 2015 were selected as research objects.According to the principle of randomization,they were evenly divided into control group and experimental group.In the experimental group,locking compression plate for fixation was used,while in the control group,external fixator was adopted.After treatment,the healing situation,torsionangle,axial displacement and bending stress between two groups were compared.Inaddition,therapeutic total effective rate and incidence of complication between two groups were also compared. Results There was no significant difference in the twist angle between the two groups(P＞0.05).The axial displacement and bending stress in the experimental group were significantly lower than those in the control group,with statistical differences(P＜0.05).The total effective rate in the control group was 77.78%,and it was significantly lower than that in the experimental group accounting for 94.44%,which was displayed a statistical significance(χ2=4.43,P＜0.05).The incidence rate of complication in the control group was 33.33%,ans it was higher than that in the experimental group accounting for 5.56%,with a statistical difference(χ2=4.43,P＜0.05).Conclusion Compared with the external fixator,the application of locking compression plate in the treatment of distal tibial fractures can obtain a remarkable clinical efficacy in a low incidence of complications,which is worthy of clinical application and promotion.

Key words： Distal tibialfracture Locking compression plate Complication

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	TAN Jin-hong
	LI Qiao
	LU Sheng-hua
	CHEN Xiang-jie
	CAO Jia-hui

Cite this article:

TAN Jin-hong,LI Qiao,LU Sheng-hua, et al. Practice and evaluation of locking compression plate and external fixator in patients with distal tibial fracture[J]. 中国当代医药, 2017, 24(7): 106-108.

URL:

http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/ OR http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/Y2017/V24/I7/106

[1]	高翔.解剖形锁定钢板治疗胫骨远端骨折48例分析[J].当代医学，2014，20（8）：85.
[2]	赵海涛，殷兵，李彦森，等.胫骨干骨折流行病学特征的地区差异分析[J].中国临床医生杂志，2015，43（2）：42-45.
[3]	邝国军，骆永锋，吴俊，等.两种微创疗法治疗胫骨远端骨折临床疗效分析[J].实用骨科杂志，2016，22（5）：450-454. [4]吴磊，魏更生，吴京亮，等.关节镜辅助有限切开复位内固定治疗胫骨平台骨折[J].中国临床医生杂志，2016，44（7）：76-78.
[5]	张勃.微创手术与传统手术方法治疗胫骨远端骨折疗效比较[J].当代医学，2014，20（36）：93-94.
[6]	许冰，谭均，晏葵，等.MIPPO技术结合LCP钢板内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折的临床观察[J].四川医学，2013，34（12）：1858-1859.
[7]	詹美熊，胡建山，陆耀宇，等.MIPPO技术结合锁定加压钢板治疗胫骨远端骨折临床疗效观察[J].北方药学，2014，31（1）：104-105.
[8]	肖靓琨，曹斌，张海卫，等.闭合复位微创经皮锁定加压钢板内固定治疗胫骨骨折[J].中国骨科临床与基础研究杂志，2013，5（5）：297-299.
[9]	姜福龙，郭志强，徐丽丽.微创内固定技术与切开复位钢板内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折疗效比较[J].临床骨科杂志，2013，16（1）：68-70.
[10]	陈军，乔绍文.经皮微创植入LCP治疗胫骨远端骨折[J].生物骨材料与临床研究，2014，11（5）：41-43.
[11]	邹凯，车彪，王凯，等.微创经皮钢板内固定与切开复位钢板内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折的疗效对比研究[J].临床和实验医学杂志，2013，12（11）：851-852.
[12]	曾健聪，林卓锋，杨云海.微创内固定技术与切开复位钢板内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折的效果比较[J].中国当代医药，2014，21（16）：63-64，67.
[13]	王国利，张建华，张旭.LCP内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折过程中微创钢板内固定技术的应用[J].山东医药2014，54（3）：79-81.
[14]	袁瑞新，张利辉，张晓光，等.前外侧锁定加压钢板治疗高能量胫骨远端骨折[J].临床骨科杂志，2015，18（1）：103-105.
[15]	王炜，李富航，陈轲.微创经皮锁定加压钢板术钢板内固定治疗胫骨骨折疗效观察[J].中国临床医生杂志，2016，44（10）：51-53.
[16]	姚军.不同内固定方式治疗高龄胫骨远端骨折疗效比较[J].浙江临床医学，2015，17（5）：778-779.