摘要
目的回顾性分析股骨颈动力交叉钉系统(FNS)与空心加压螺钉(CCS)治疗股骨颈骨折的临床疗效并做出比较。方法选取2019年10月至2021年1月安徽医科大学第二附属医院收治的股骨颈骨折患者31例。其中股骨颈动力交叉钉系统组11例(FNS组),空心加压螺钉组20例(CCS组),所有患者均为Garden分型Ⅱ、Ⅲ或Ⅳ型。FNS组男7例,女4例;年龄25~73岁;CCS组男9例,女11例;年龄19~73岁。记录并比较两组的手术时间、术中透视次数、术中出血量、住院时间、Garden指数、骨折愈合时间、术后患肢短缩情况、末次随访髋关节Harris评分及并发症发生情况。结果两组均获得随访,随访时间6~16个月。两组的手术时间、住院时间、Garden指数、末次随访Harris髋关节评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);FNS组术中出血量高于CCS组(P<0.05);FNS组的术中透视次数少于CCS组(P<0.05);FNS组骨折愈合时间短于CCS组(P<0.05);FNS组术后患肢短缩情况优于CCS组(P<0.05);FNS组患者股骨颈骨折均愈合,随访期间无股骨头坏死等并发症发生,CCS组出现1例患者断钉,进而发展为股骨头坏死,另有1例患者出现股骨头坏死;2组患者均无肺栓塞、下肢静脉血栓形成等并发症发生。结论FNS治疗股骨颈骨折创伤小,与CCS相比,FNS可减少术中透视次数,减少股骨颈的短缩,生物力学更加稳定,可获得满意的临床疗效。
Objective To retrospectively analyze and compare the clinical effects of femoral neck dynamic cross nail system(FNS)and cannulated compression screw(CCS)in the treatment of femoral neck fracture.Methods A total of 31 patients with femoral neck fracture admitted to the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University from October 2019 to January 2021 were selected.There were 11 cases in femoral neck system group(FNS group)and 20 cases in cannulated compression screw group(CCS group),and all patients were classified as Garden typeⅡ,ⅢorⅣ.There were 7 males and4 females in the FNS group,aged from 25 to 73 years old;there were 9 males and 11 females in the CCS group,aged from19 to 73 years old.The operation time,intraoperative fluoroscopy times,intraoperative blood loss,length of hospital stay,garden index,fracture healing time,postoperative limb shortening,Harris score of the last follow-up of the hip joint and the occurrence of complications were recorded and compared between the two groups.Results Both groups were followed up for 6-16 months.There was no significant difference in operation time,hospital stay,Garden index and Harris hip score after operation between the two groups(P>0.05).The intraoperative blood loss in FNS group was higher than that in CCS group(P<0.05).The number of intraoperative fluoroscopies in FNS group was lower than that in CCS group(P<0.05).The time of fracture healing in FNS group was shorter than that in CCS group(P<0.05).FNS group was better than CCS group in postoperative limb shortening(P<0.05).In the FNS group,femoral neck fractures were all healed,and no complications such as femoral head necrosis occurred during the follow-up period.In the CCS group,1 patient suffered from nail breakage and developed femoral head necrosis,and another 1 patient developed femoral head necrosis.There were no pulmonary embolism,lower extremity venous thrombosis and other complications in two groups.Conclusion The FNS treatment of femoral neck fractures trauma is small.Compared with CCS,FNS
作者
赵耀
程文丹
许新忠
周云
郭灰灰
张积森
Zhao Yao;Cheng Wendan;Xu Xinzhong;Zhou Yun;Guo Huihui;Zhang Jisen(Department of Orthopedics,Second Hospital of Anhui Medical University,Hefei Anhui,230601,China)
出处
《生物骨科材料与临床研究》
CAS
2022年第2期67-72,共6页
Orthopaedic Biomechanics Materials and Clinical Study
基金
安徽科技厅科技惠民示范工程(S202007d07050015)。
