Sponsor
  • ·
  • Chinese Association of
    Integrative Medicine;
    China Academy of Chinese
    Medicine Sciences
Editing
  • ·
  • Editorial Board of
    China Journal of
    Orthopaedics and Traumatology
Publishing
  • ·
  • Publishing House,
    China Journal of
    Orthopaedics and Traumatology
Overseas Distributor
  • ·
  • China International Book
    Trading Corporation
    P.O.Box 399,Beijing,China
    Code No.M587
Mail-order
  • ·
  • Publishing House,
    China Journal of
    Orthopaedics and Traumatology
    No.16A, Nanxiaojie, Dongzhimennei,
    Beijing 100700,China
    Tel:0086-10-84020925
    Fax:0086-10-84036581
    Http://www.zggszz.com
    E-mail:zggszz@sina.com
股骨颈骨折两种治疗方法的比较
Hits: 2085   Download times: 1330   Received:May 09, 2002    
作者Author单位UnitE-Mail
刘子山 LIU Zishan 隆回县中医院,湖南隆回422200 Longhui Hospital of Tradition Chinese Medicine Hunan Longhui 422200  
刘旭光 LIU Xuguang 隆回县中医院,湖南隆回422200 Longhui Hospital of Tradition Chinese Medicine Hunan Longhui 422200  
龚洪国 GONG Hongguo 隆回县中医院,湖南隆回422200 Longhui Hospital of Tradition Chinese Medicine Hunan Longhui 422200  
王永善 隆回县中医院,湖南隆回422200 Longhui Hospital of Tradition Chinese Medicine Hunan Longhui 422200  
范文 隆回县中医院,湖南隆回422200 Longhui Hospital of Tradition Chinese Medicine Hunan Longhui 422200  
期刊信息:《中国骨伤》2003年16卷,第5期,第257-259页
DOI:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1003-0034.yyyy.nn.zzz


目的:探讨闭合复位内固定与切开复位内固定治疗股骨颈骨折的疗效、各自优缺点及最佳适应症。

方法:将98例股骨颈骨折患者随机分为两组,分别采用闭合复位内固定术及切开复位内固定术治疗。其中闭合复位组56例,切开复位组42例。

结果: 经1~5年,平均26年的随访。闭合复位组:治愈33例,好转20例,未愈3例;切开复位组:治愈21例,好转19例,未愈2例。两种治疗方法临床效果无统计学差别(P>0.05)。

结论:对能闭合复位满意的新鲜股骨颈骨折,闭合复位内固定应视为有效、可靠的首选方法。
[关键词]:股骨颈骨折  手法,骨科  骨折固定术,内
 
Comparison of two methods for the treament of femoral neck fractures
Abstract:

Objective:To investigate the effect and the indications for the treatment of the femoral neck fractures with closed and open reduction fixation

Methods:98 patients with femoral neck fractures were divided into two groups randomly,56 cases with closed reduction and internal fixation and 42 cases with open group,with respective adoption of the treatment of internal fixations of closed and open reduction and internal fixation.

Results:After 1 to 5 years follow up (average 2 6 years),33 are cured,20 improved and 3 uncured in closed group.21 are cured,19 improved and 2 uncured in open group.There is no significant differences between the two Methods(P>0.05).

Conclusion:The closed reduction should be selected firstly for the treatment for fresh femoral neck fractures.The combined internal fixation and muscle pedicle bone grafts should be used for the treatment of old femoral neck fractures with communicated fragments or posterior defects and unsatisfied closed reduction.
KEYWORDS:Femoral neck fractures  Manipulation,orthopaedic  Fracture fixation,internal
 
引用本文,请按以下格式著录参考文献:
中文格式:刘子山,刘旭光,龚洪国,王永善,范文.股骨颈骨折两种治疗方法的比较[J].中国骨伤,2003,16(5):257~259
英文格式:LIU Zishan,LIU Xuguang,GONG Hongguo.Comparison of two methods for the treament of femoral neck fractures[J].zhongguo gu shang / China J Orthop Trauma ,2003,16(5):257~259
View Full Text  View/Add Comment  Download reader
Close




版权所有:Editorial Office of China Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology京ICP备12048066号  版权声明
地址:No.16A, Nanxiaojie, Dongzhimennei, Beijing 100700, China
电话:0086-10-84036581 传真:0086-10-84036581 Email:zggszz@sina.com