首页> 外文期刊>Orthopedics >Management of Humeral Shaft Fractures With Intramedullary Interlocking Nail Versus Locking Compression Plate
【24h】

Management of Humeral Shaft Fractures With Intramedullary Interlocking Nail Versus Locking Compression Plate

机译:髓内互锁钉与加压加压钢板治疗肱骨干骨折。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Surgical fixation of humeral shaft fractures generally involves plating or nailing. It is unclear whether one method is more effective than the other. The aim of this study was to compare the results of the intramedullary nail and locking compression plate for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. A total of 60 patients with humeral shaft fractures were randomized to undergo surgery with an intramedullary interlocking nail (n=30) or locking compression plate (n=30). The outcome was assessed in terms of intraoperative blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, union time, union rate, functional outcome, and incidence of complications. Functional outcome was assessed using the Constant score and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score. Intraoperative blood loss, operative time, and hospital stay in group A (intramedullary interlocking nail) were significantly lower than those in group B (locking compression plate). No statistically significant difference was found regarding the union rate, mean Constant score, and mean ASES score between the groups. The average union time was found to be significantly lower for the intramedullary interlocking nail compared with the locking compression plate. The incidence of complications such as radial nerve palsy was found to be higher with the locking compression plate compared with the intramedullary interlocking nail. The intramedullary interlocking nail can be considered a better surgical option for the management of humeral shaft fractures because it offers decreased intraoperative blood loss; shorter operative times, hospital stays, and union times; and a lower incidence of serious complications such as radial nerve palsy.
机译:肱骨干骨折的外科手术固定通常包括钢板或钉子。尚不清楚一种方法是否比另一种方法更有效。这项研究的目的是比较髓内钉和锁定加压钢板治疗肱骨干骨折的结果。总共60例肱骨干骨折患者被随机分配接受髓内互锁钉(n = 30)或锁定加压板(n = 30)进行手术。根据术中失血量,手术时间,住院时间,合并时间,合并率,功能结局和并发症发生率评估结局。使用恒定评分和美国肩肘外科医师(ASES)评分评估功能结局。 A组(锁髓内钉)的术中失血量,手术时间和住院时间均明显低于B组(锁紧加压板)。两组之间的联合率,平均常数得分和平均ASES得分均无统计学差异。发现与锁紧加压板相比,髓内互锁钉的平均结合时间明显更低。发现与锁髓内钉相比,锁定加压板的并发症发生率更高,例如radial神经麻痹。髓内互锁钉可作为减少肱骨干骨折的术中失血的方法,可被认为是治疗肱骨干骨折的较好手术方法。手术时间,住院时间和就诊时间缩短;严重并发症(例如radial神经麻痹)的发生率较低。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号