改良外侧横直切口与外侧L形切口治疗跟骨骨折的效果比较

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

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

Abstract Objective To explore the clinical effects of modified lateral straight incision and lateral L-shaped incision in the treatment of calcaneal fractures. Methods A total of 46 patients with calcaneal fractures admitted to the Department of Orthopedics, Jieyang People′s Hospital from December 2015 to February 2020 were selected as the research objects. They were divided into the control group and the study group according to the random table method, with 23 cases in each group. The control group were treated with the lateral L-shape incision, and the study group were treated with modified lateral straight incisions. The surgical indicators, complications and curative effects were compared between the two groups. Results The operation time and hospital stay time in the study group were shorter than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05). The length of surgical incision in the study group was shorter than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05). There was no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss between the two groups (P＞0.05). The total incidence of complications in the study group was lower than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05). The total effective rate in the study group was higher than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05). Conclusion The modified lateral straight incisions applicated in calcaneal fracture, shorten the hospital stay time and operation time, save the treatment cost, reduce the complications such as incision infection and skin edge necrosis, which could be applied and promoted.

Key words： Modified lateral straight incision Lateral L-shaped incision Calcaneal fracture Treatment effect

Received: 03 August 2020

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors

Cite this article:

URL:

http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/ OR http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/Y2021/V28/I12/98

[1]	Prabhakar S，Dhillon MS，Khurana A，et al.The "Open-Envelope" Approach：A Limited Open Approach for Calcaneal Fracture Fixation[J].IJO，2018，52（3）：231.
[2]	谢易，龚泰芳，李彬彬，等.微创切口入路治疗SandersⅡ、Ⅲ型跟骨骨折体会[J].创伤外科杂志，2018，20（5）：78-79.
[3]	桑庆华，哈秀民，姜佩瑜，等.撑开器双向撑开辅助闭合复位微创接骨板内固定治疗跟骨骨折[J].中国骨伤，2018，31（7）：604-607.
[4]	陈卓，干耀恺，史定伟，等.骨内内固定在足踝关节融合术中的应用[J].中华创伤骨科杂志，2019，21（4）：328-332.
[7]	王海龙，葛双雷，张学东，等.闭合复位无头加压螺钉与切开复位钛板螺钉内固定治疗SandersⅡ、Ⅲ型跟骨骨折的疗效比较[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2018，33（6）：598-601.
[5]	张明，徐俊华，张奕.外固定架辅助复位微创钢板内固定治疗移位跟骨骨折15 例的临床疗效[J].重庆医学，2018，47（36）：120-121.
[6]	Park YH，Lee JW，Hong JY，et al.Predictors of compartment syndrome of the foot after fracture of the calcaneus[J].BONE JOINT J，2018，100（3）：303-308.
[8]	余江，胡兆洋，李光胜，等.不同缝合方法预防或减少跟骨骨折切口并发症的对比研究[J].实用医学杂志，2018，34（1）：93-95，99.
[9]	杨广钢，潘永雄，李中万.高负压与常规引流对跟骨骨折术后失血与切口愈合的前瞻性随机对照研究[J].中华创伤骨科杂志，2018，1（2）：118-122.
[10]	杨彬.改良跗骨窦切口解剖型锁定钢板内固定治疗SandersⅢ-Ⅳ型跟骨骨折[J].中国骨伤，2018，31（7）：599-603.
[11]	陈斌，张焱，穆帅，等.经皮与切开复位内固定治疗SandersⅡ、Ⅲ型跟骨骨折的对比[J].中国矫形外科杂志，2019，27（14）：1274-1278.
[12]	熊斌，周云，詹俊锋，等.红外线联合气压治疗在跟骨骨折切开复位内固定术患者围术期的应用效果研究[J].中国全科医学，2019，22（17）：2125-2129.
[13]	张道鑫，韩庆斌，徐留海.经跗骨窦小切口与L 形切口治疗SandersⅡ、Ⅲ、Ⅳ型跟骨骨折疗效比较[J].临床骨科杂志，2018，21（3）：357-360.
[15]	程千，赵建忠.改良切口与传统L 形切口治疗跟骨骨折的临床疗效对比[J].实用医学杂志，2016，32（14）：2374-2376.
[14]	Backes M，Spijkerman IJ，de Muinck-Keizer RO，et al.Determination of Pathogens in Postoperative Wound Infection After Surgically Reduced Calcaneal Fractures and Implications for Prophylaxis and Treatment[J].J FOOT ANKLE SURG，2018，57（1）：100-103.