摘要
目的观察生物型全髋置换及骨水泥全髋置换在髋关节疾病中的临床治疗效果。方法选择68例行全髋置换患者,根据全髋材料不同分为对照组和观察组,对照组采用骨水泥全髋置换,观察组采用生物型全髋置换。比较两组治疗效果、治疗后髋关节功能恢复情况及并发症发生情况。结果观察组患者的术后引流量、术后下床活动时间、扶拐活动时间均显著优于对照组(P<0.05);随访6个月、1年的Harris评分显著高于对照组(P<0.05);并发症发生率显著低于对照组(P<0.05)。结论生物型全髋置换的临床效果优于骨水泥全髋置换,术后患者髋关节功能恢复良好,并发症少。
Objective To observe clinical effect of uncemented total hip arthroplasty and bone cement total hip arthroplasty in hip joint disease. Methods Sixty-eight cases of patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty were selected and divided into control group and observation group according to different total hip materials. The control group accepted bone cement total hip arthroplasty, while the observation group accepted uncemented total hip arthroplasty. The therapeutic effects of the two groups, the recovery of hip function and the incidence of complications after treatment were compared.Results The postoperative drainage volume, the postoperative time of getting out of bed and the time of moving the scaffolding in the observation group were significantly better than those in the control group（P〈0.05）; the Harris scores when followed up for 6 months and 1 year were significantly higher than those in the control group（P〈0.05）; the incidence rate of complications were significantly lower than that in the control group（P〈0.05）. Conclusion The clinical effect of uncemented total hip arthroplasty is better than that of bone cement total hip arthroplasty. The function of hip joint is good and the complications are few.
出处
《临床医学研究与实践》
2017年第6期83-84,共2页
Clinical Research and Practice
关键词
生物型全髋置换
骨水泥全髋置换
HARRIS评分
uncemented total hip arthroplasty
bone cement total hip arthroplasty
Harris score
