| 胫骨开放骨折不扩髓交锁髓内钉与外固定支架治疗比较 |
|
摘要点击次数: 1928
全文下载次数: 1256
投稿时间：1998-12-02 修订日期：1999-04-13
|
|
|
| 期刊信息：《中国骨伤》2000年，第13卷，第1期，第14-15页 |
| DOI：doi:10.3969/j.issn.1003-0034.yyyy.nn.zzz |
| 基金项目: |
|
中文摘要:
目的:对比外固定支架与不扩髓交锁髓内钉对胫骨Ⅲ型B开放骨折的治疗结果。
方法:33例胫骨Ⅲ型B开放骨折的患者,随机分为两个治疗组,17例采用外固定支架,16例采用髓内钉固定,进行疗效对比分析。
结果:髓内钉组的感染率、不良愈合率、不愈合率及愈合时间均低于支架组,且前者更容易护理,二期创面处理更方便。
结论:我们认为不扩髓交锁髓内钉较之外固定支架更适用于Ⅲ型B胫骨开放骨折。 |
| 【关键词】胫骨开放骨折 外固定支架 髓内钉 |
| |
| Treatment of Open Tibial Fractures:Comparison of Non reamed Interlocking Intramedullary Nail and External Fixator |
|
ABSTRACT
Objective:To compare the treatment results of non reamed interlocking intramedullary nail and external fixator in Grade Ⅲ B open tibial fractures.
Methods:Of 33 cases,17 were treated with external fixator;16 were treated with non reamed interlocking intramedullary nails.
Results:The nailed group have advantage over the external fixed group as follows:lower rate of infection,delayed union and nonunion;short time of healing;easier care;easier management of the wound.
Conclusion:Compared with external fixation,non reamed interlocking intramedullary nail is more suitable for the treatment of Grade Ⅲ B open tibial fracture. |
| KEY WORDS Open tibial fracture External fixator Intramedullary nail |
| |
| 引用本文，请按以下格式著录参考文献： |
| 中文格式: | 江敞,唐明杰,施忠民.胫骨开放骨折不扩髓交锁髓内钉与外固定支架治疗比较[J].中国骨伤,2000,13(1):14~15 |
| 英文格式: | JIANG Chang,TANG Ming jie,SHI Zhong min.Treatment of Open Tibial Fractures:Comparison of Non reamed Interlocking Intramedullary Nail and External Fixator[J].zhongguo gu shang / China J Orthop Trauma ,2000,13(1):14~15 |
|
| 阅读全文 下载 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
