论文部分内容阅读
目的：比较LCP钢板与髓内钉内固定治疗急诊胫骨开放性骨折的临床疗效，为治疗急诊胫骨开放性骨折提供依据。方法选取北京市红十字会急诊抢救中心2014年2月～2015年3月期间急诊收治的胫骨开放性骨折患者74例，比较采用LCP钢板与髓内钉内固定治疗胫骨开放性骨折之间的差异。结果LCP钢板组与髓内钉内固定组在手术平均时间、切口长度、出血量、骨折愈合平均时间、术后感染率比较差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。术后2组70例获得12个月随访。3、6、12个月随访可见髓内钉内固定组骨折生长良好，与LCP钢板组比较差异有统计学意义（χ2=4.399，P=0.035）。结论 LCP钢板与髓内钉内固定相比，具有对软组织损伤小，术后感染率低，复位精确、骨折愈合快等优点，是一种治疗急诊胫骨开放性骨折有效的方法。“,”Objective To compare the clinical effects of internal fixation with locking compression plate (LCP) of intramedullary nail in treatment of open fracture of tibia. Methods 74 patients with open fracture of tibia were randomly divided into 2 groups to undergo LCP treatment (n=39) or treatment with intramedullary nail (n=35). The curative effects were compared. Results The operation time of the intramedullary nail group was (120.00 ± 18.20) min, significantly shorter than that of the LCP group [(125.00 ± 20.82) min, P<0.05]. The hospitalization time of the intramedullary nail group was (20.8300 ± 1.71) months, significantly shorter than that of the LCP group [(22.56 ± 2.81) months, P<0.05]. The incision length of the intramedullary nail group was (9.24 ± 18.60) cm, significantly shorter than that of the LCP group [(125.00 ± 20.82) cm, P<0.05]. The wound infection rate of the intramedullary nail group was 5.13%, significantly lower than that of the LCP group (9.68%, P<0.05). The situations of callus growth 3, 6, and 12 months after operation of the intramedullary nail group were all signicantly better than those of the LCP group (all P<0.05). Conclusion The clinical effects of intramedullary nail in treatment of open fracture of tibia is significantly better than that of LCP.