摘要
目的比较经髋关节外科脱位打压植骨术与髓芯减压支撑植骨术治疗国际骨循环研究会(ARCO Ⅲ期股骨头缺血性坏死(avascular necrosis of the femoral head,ANFH)的疗效。方法回顾性分析2013年10月—2016年4月收治并符合选择标准的60例(69髋)ARCO Ⅲ期非创伤性ANFH患者临床资料。其中,24例(28髋)行经髋关节外科脱位打压植骨支撑术治疗(A组),36例(41髋)行髓芯减压、坏死病灶清除,并打压植骨、同种异体腓骨支撑术治疗(B组)。两组患者性别构成、年龄、侧别、ANFH类型及分期、病程以及术前髋关节Harris评分、疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)等一般资料比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后采用Harris评分评价髋关节功能,X线片复查观察股骨头形态改变情况,评价患者保髋临床是否成功。结果术后两组切口均Ⅰ期愈合。两组患者均获随访,A组随访时间为12～48个月,平均25.8个月;B组为12～54个月,平均26.4个月。A组5髋保髋临床失败,股骨头生存率为82.1%,中位生存时间为43个月;B组19髋保髋临床失败,股骨头生存率为53.7%,中位生存时间为42个月;两组生存曲线分布差异有统计学意义(χ~2=4.123,P=0.042),A组优于B组。末次随访时A、B组保髋成功患者髋关节Harris评分明显高于术前,VAS评分明显低于术前(P<0.05),两组间各评分比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。X线片复查示,两组植骨均融合,融合时间组间比较差异无统计学意义(t=0.752,P=0.456)。A组大转子截骨处均愈合良好,1例髋关节周围出现异位骨化。结论对于股骨头轻度塌陷的ARCO ⅢA期患者,两种术式疗效确切;对于股骨头塌陷较严重的ARCO ⅢB期患者,经髋关节外科脱位打压植骨术后股骨头生存率优于髓芯减压支撑植骨术。
Objective To compare the effectiveness of sequestrum clearance and impacting bone graft via surgical hip dislocation approach and core decompression and bone graft for avascular necrosis of the femoral head (ANFH) at Association Research Circulation Osseous (ARCO) stage Ⅲ. Methods A clinical data of 60 patients (69 hips) of non-traumatic ANFH at ARCO stage Ⅲ, which met the inclusion criteria between October 2013 and April 2016, was retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 24 patients (28 hips) were treated with sequestrum clearance and impacting bone graft via surgical hip dislocation approach (group A);and 36 patients (41 hips) were treated with core decompression, sequestrum clearance, impacting bone graft, and nonvascular fibular allograft supporting (group B). There was no significant difference in gender, age, disease duration, affected side, type and stage of the ANFH, and preoperative Harris hip score and visual analogue scale (VAS) score between the two groups (P>0.05). After operation, the function of the hip was evaluated by Harris hip score, imaging examination was performed to observe the femoral head shape and evaluate whether the hip preserving success. Results The incisions of two groups healed by first intention. All patients were followed up. The follow-up time was 12-48 month (mean, 25.8 months) in group A and 12-54 months (mean, 26.4 months) in group B. At last follow-up, 5 hips in group A were classified as clinical failure, femoral head survival rate was 82.1%, the median survival time was 43 months. While 19 hips in group B were classified as clinical failure, femoral head survival rate was 53.7%, the median survival time was 42 months. There was significant difference in survival curve distribution between the two groups (χ^2= 4.123, P=0.042), and the surgical procedures of group A was superior to group B. In the two groups, the Harris hip scores at last follow-up were significantly higher than preoperative ones (P<0.05), and VAS scores were significantly lower than preoperative ones (P<0
作者
孙海忠
韦标方
SUN Haizhong;WEI Biaofang(Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou Guangdong, 510006, P.R.China;Specialized Subject of Femoral Head, the People’s Hospital of Linyi, Linyi Shandong, 276000, P.R.China)
出处
《中国修复重建外科杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2019年第5期531-536,共6页
Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery
基金
山东省科技攻关计划(2014GSF119022)
临沂市人民医院研究生培养基金(YJS2018051)~~
关键词
股骨头缺血性坏死
髋关节外科脱位
打压植骨术
股骨头塌陷
Avascular necrosis of the femoral head
surgical hip dislocation
impacting bone graft
collapse of the femoral head
