论文部分内容阅读
目的：比较锁定加压钢板(locking compression plate，LCP)及外固定支架结合锁定钢板治疗AO分型中C3型桡骨远端骨折的疗效。方法自2006年8月~2010年10月对49例C3型桡骨远端骨折分别采取锁定钢板(A组)及外固定支架结合锁定钢板固定(B组)，根据骨缺损情况适当植骨。分别采用VAS评分、改良Gartland和Werley(GW)评分和Batra放射学评分比较两组效果差异。结果随访时间8~26月，平均12.3月。骨折愈合时间3~6月，平均4.2月。A组24例，GW评分：优16例、良4例、可4例；Batra放射学评分：优14例、良8例、可2例。 B组25例：GW评分：优22例、良3例；Batra放射学评分：优23例、良2例。结论对C3桡骨远端骨折，两种方法均能取得较为满意的临床效果，相对于单纯锁定钢板固定，外固定支架结合锁定钢板能取得更高的解剖复位率及临床优良率。“,”Objective To compare the clinical efficacy between locking compression plate and external fixation combined with locking compression plate in the treatment of type C3 distal radius fractures. Methods From August 2006 to October 2010, 49 patients with type C3 distal radius fractures were fixed with locking compression plate (group A) and external fixator combined with locking compression plate (group B). Appropriate bone grafting were applied according to the condition of bone defect. The effects of two groups were compared with VAS score, modified Gartland and Werley (GW) score and Batra radiology score. Results All patients were followed up for 8to 26 months(average 12.3 months).All fractures united in 3 to 6 months (average 4.2 months).Among 24 cases of group A, GW score: 16 cases were excellent , 4 cases good, 4 cases fair; Batra radiological score: 14 cases were excellent, 8 cases good, 2 cases fair. Among 25 cases of group B, GW score: 22 cases were excellent , 3 cases good; Batra radiological score: 23 cases were excellent, 2 cases good. Conclusion For the type C3 distal radius fractures,The two methods can achieve satisfactory clinical results. However,external fixation combined with locking compression plate can achieve a higher anatomical reduction rate and clinical excellent rate than simple locking plate fixation.