Objective To compare the effect of minimally invasive percutaneous plate fixation and open reduction and internal fixation for treatment of distal tibial fracture. Methods Selected from January, 2012 to May, 2013 in our hospital were as the research object. All patients were randomly divided into two groups. 45 patients of the experimental group were treated by minimally invasive percutaneous plate fixation, and 45 patients of the control group were treated by open reduction and internal fixation, then compared the clinical efficacy of the two treatments. Results The experimental group's blood loss was significantly less than the control group's (P<0.05); the experimental fracture healing time was significantly less than the control group (P<0.05); excellent rate of the experimental group was significantly higher than the control group, and the difference has statistical significance (P<0.05). The number of patients in the experimental group with postoperative infection, deep vein thrombosis, nonunion or delayed healing were significantly less than the control group (P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with open reduction and internal fixation, using minimally invasive percutaneous plate internal fixation to treat distal tibial fractures has smaller tissue damage, better efficacy, shorter healing time, and can decrease the incidence of infection and other complications. It is worth of popularization.%目的：比较经皮微创钢板内固定与切开复位内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折的疗效。方法选取2012年1月—2013年5月收治的90例胫骨远端骨折患者分为两组。实验组45例，采用经皮微创钢板内固定；对照组45例，采用切开复位内固定，比较两种治疗方法的临床疗效。结果实验组术中出血量明显少于对照组（P<0.05）；实验组骨折愈合时间明显短于对照组（P<0.05）；实验组优良率明显高于对照组，且差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）；实验组术后发生感染、深静脉血栓、骨折不愈合或延迟愈合的例数明显少于对照组（P<0.05）。结论采用经皮微创钢板内固定相比切开复位内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折对组织的损伤更小，疗效更好，骨折愈合时间更短，感染等并发症的发病率更低，值得临床推广应用。
展开▼
