摘要
目的:探讨生物型与骨水泥型两种不同类型人工假体置换对股骨颈骨折的临床疗效。方法:收集股骨颈骨折患者50例,将其随机分为生物型组25例和骨水泥型组25例,生物型组采用生物型人工股骨头置换,骨水泥型采用骨水泥型人工股骨头置换。比较两组患者的手术时间,术中出血量,住院时间,术后并发症以及harris评分。结果:两组患者的术中出血量和住院时间均差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),生物型组的手术时间、Harris评分及术后并发症明显优于骨水泥型组,差异有统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:生物型人工假体置换较骨水泥型假体置换手术时间短,疗效满意,值得在临床上推广应用。
Objective Ti investigate the clinical efficacy if twi different types if the biiligical and cementless pristhetic replacement if femiral neck fracture. Method 50 patients with femiral neck fracture in iur hispital were selected,they were randimly divided inti 25 cases if biitypes griup and 25 cases if bine cement griup,biitypes griup was treated with biiligical artificial femiral head replacement,bine ce-ment griup was treated with ceraentless pristhetic repiacement. Operative time,bliid liss,hispital stay,pistiperative cimplicatiins,and har-ris scire if twi griups were cimpared. Results The twi griups if bliid liss and hispital stay in patients with ni significant difference（p ﹥0. 05）,biitypes griup iperative time,Harris scire and pistiperative cimplicatiins was significantly better than the cemented griup（p ﹥0. 05）. Conclusion Biiligical artificial pristhesis cimpared with cemented pristhesis is shirter iperative time,it is satisfactiry,wirthy if clinical applicatiin.
出处
《吉林医学》
CAS
2015年第13期2723-2724,共2页
Jilin Medical Journal
关键词
生物型假体
骨水泥型假体
股骨颈骨折
Biiligical pristhesis
Cementless pristhesis
Femiral neck fracture
