论文部分内容阅读
目的 探讨微创直接前入路和后外侧小切口人路全髋关节置换术的差异.方法 收集2010年1月-2016年5月武警总医院接受全髋关节置换术的患者,分为研究组(接受微创直接前人路全髋关节置换术)和对照组(接受后外侧小切口入路全髋关节置换术).对比:①两组切口长度、手术时间、出血量及输血量.②两组术前与术后3月Harris评分.③两组术后首次双拐行走时间、弃拐行走时间.结果 ①两组切口长度比较无差异(P＞0.05);两组手术时间、出血量及输血量比较有差异(P＜0.05).②两组术前Harris评分比较无差异(P＞0.05);两组术后3月Harris评分比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).③两组术后首次双拐行走时间、弃拐行走时间比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 微创直接前入路手术创伤小,在手术出血量、输血量及术后Harris评分上明显有优势.“,”Objective To explore the different efficacy of total hip arthroplasty by minimally invasive direct anterior approach and posterior lateral small incision approach.Methods The patients underwent total hip replacement from January 2010 until so far in our hospital were collected and divided into the study group (treated with minimally invasive direct before approach total hip arthroplasty) and the control group (received posterolateral small incision total hip arthroplasty).The length of incision,operation time,amount of bleeding and blood transfusion were compared between the two groups (1).(2) preoperative and postoperative Harris scores of two groups.(3) the two groups after the first time,crutches to walk walk time.Results (1) there was no difference in the length of incision between the two groups (P ＞0.05);the operation time,the amount of bleeding and blood transfusion were different (P ＜0.05).(2) there were no differences in preoperative Harris scores between the two groups (P ＞0.05);there were differences in the two groups after the operation (P ＜0.05) in March.(3) the two groups after the first time,crutches to walk walk time difference (P ＜0.05).Conclusion Minimally invasive direct anterior approach surgical trauma is small,the amount of bleeding,blood transfusion and postoperative harris score had obvious advantages.