目的 对比单侧多功能支架外固定与Ⅰ期钢板内固定治疗GustiloⅡ型胫骨开放性骨折的临床疗效.方法 将60例GustiloⅡ型胫骨开放性骨折患者按随机数字表法分为研究组和对照组,每组30例,研究组采用单侧多功能支架外固定治疗,对照组采用Ⅰ期钢板内固定治疗.比较两组患者手术时间、切口长度、住院天数、骨折愈合所需时间以及并发症发生情况,采用Johner-Wruhs法评定临床疗效.结果 研究组手术时间、切口长度、住院天数以及骨折愈合时间均明显短于对照组(P<0.05).研究组总并发症发生率为10.00％,低于对照组的33.33％(P<0.05).研究组及对照组的优良率分别为93.33％和73.33％,研究组临床疗效优于对照组(P<0.05).结论 与Ⅰ期钢板内固定治疗相比,单侧多功能支架外固定治疗GustiloⅡ型胫骨开放性骨折的疗效更显著,且具有并发症少、骨折愈合快等优点.%Objective To compare the clinical efficacy between unilateral external fixation with multifunctional scaffold and stageⅠ plate internal fixation for the treatment of Gustilo typeⅡopen tibial fracture. Methods Sixty patients with Gustilo typeⅡopen tibial fracture were divided into study group and control group according to the random number table method,with 30 cases in each group. The study group was treated with unilateral external fixation with multifunctional scaffold,and the control group with stageⅠplate internal fixation. The operation duration,incision length,hospital stay,time for fracture healing and incidence of complications were compared between the two groups,and the Johner-Wruhs score was used to evaluate the clinical efficacy. Results The operation duration,incision length,hospital stay and time for fracture healing in the study group were significantly shorter than those in the control group(P<0. 05). The overall incidence rate of complications in the study group was lower than that in the control group(10. 00％ vs 33. 33％;P<0. 05). The excellent and good rates of the study group and the control group were 93. 33％ and 73. 33％,respectively,and the clinical efficacy of the study group was superior to that of the control group(P<0. 05). Conclusion Compared with stage Ⅰ plate internal fixation,unilateral external fixation with multifunctional scaffold has more significant effects on Gustilo type Ⅱ open tibial fracture,with advantages of less complications and faster fracture healing.
展开▼
