论文部分内容阅读
【目的】比较克氏针和微型钢板内固定治疗不同节段掌指骨骨折临床疗效。【方法】回顾性分析本院2010年2月至2013年9月收治的136例掌指骨骨折患者的临床资料。其中64例（82处）采用克氏针内固定方法（克氏针组），72例（93处）采用微型钢板内固定方法（微型钢板组），分别比较两种治疗方法对不同节段掌指骨骨折的疗效差异。【结果】克氏针组患者的疗效优良率为73．68％，显著低于微型钢板组的95．65％（ P ＜0．05）。针对不同节段掌指骨骨折，克氏针组近节指骨折患者的疗效优良率为81．48％，低于微型钢板组的87．50％，但二者差异无显著性（ P ＞0．05）；克氏针组中节指骨折患者的疗效优良率为86．11％，显著的高于微型钢板组的63．16％（P＜0．05）。克氏针组患者掌骨骨折和近节指骨折愈合时间[（7．6±0．4）周和（7．8±0．5）周]显著高于微型钢板组患者[（6．1±0．5）周和（6．8±0．5）周]，差异有统计学意义（ P ＜0．05），但两者中节指骨骨折的骨折愈合时间差异无显著性（P ＞0．05）。两组患者的术后感染、骨延迟愈合率差异也无显著性（P ＞0．05）。【结论】微型钢板内固定法适合治疗掌骨骨折，克氏针法适合治疗中节指骨骨折，两种方法对近节指骨折的治疗效果相近，但采用微型钢板内固定法可以缩短其骨折愈合时间。“,”[Objective] To compare the clinical efficacies of internal fixation with Kirschner wire versus mini‐plate for different segments of metacarpal fracture .[Methods]From February 2010 to September 2013 ,the clinical data of 136 pa‐tient with metacarpal fracture were retrospectively collected .They were divided into two groups of Kirschner wire ( n=64) and mini‐plate ( n=72) .Their efficacies were compared .[Results] The good rate in Kirschner wire group was sig‐nificantly lower than that in mini‐plate group (73 .68% vs 95 .65% ,P 0 .05) .The good rate was higher in Kirschner group than that in micro‐plate group in the treatment of middle phalanx (86 .11% vs 63 .16% ,P<0 .05) .The mini‐plate group was significantly lower than the Kirschner wire with regards to healing times of metacarpal and proximal phalanx fractures [(7 .6 ± 0 .4) vs (6 .1 ± 0 .5) weeks ,(7 .8 ± 0 .5) vs (6 .8 ± 0 .5) weeks ,P0 .05) .[Conclusion]Mini‐plate internal fixation is superior in the treatment of metacarpal fractures while Kirschner wire fares better for middle phalanx .And two treatments are similarly efficacious for proximal phalanx fracture .