Bold钉和微型钢板治疗MasonⅡ、Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折的临床疗效比较

摘要

Objective To compare the clinical effectiveness of Bold screw and micro plate in treating Mason Ⅱ / Ⅲ type fractures of radial head.Methods Seventy-four patients with Mason Ⅱ / Ⅲ type of radial head fractures were treated,including 38 cases receiving Bold screw fixation and 34 cases receiving micro plate fixation.The function of motion was assessed with Broberg and Morrey elbow scores and the postoperative pain was assessed with VAS.Results All the incisions primarily were healed and the patients were followed up for 10.1 to 15.7 months.The postoperative pain VAS score was lower,and the Broberg and Morrey elbow scores were higher in Bold screw group than those in micro plate group (all P＜0.05),while there was no significant difference in mean flexion/extension of the elbow between the two groups (all P ＞0.05).Conclusion The Bold screw faxition for treating Mason Ⅱ / Ⅲ type radial head fracture has advantages of better reduction,easier operating,less damage and more reliable faxition compared to micro plate faxition.%目的 比较Bold钉和微型钢板两种切开复位内固定方法治疗Mason Ⅱ、Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折的临床疗效.方法 收集Mason Ⅱ、Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折患者74例,其中38例采用Bold钉切开复位内固定治疗(Bold钉组),36例采用微型钢板切开复位内固定治疗(微型钢板组).采用Broberg和Morrey肘关节功能评分标准评定患者术后疗效,采用疼痛VAS评分评价患者术后疼痛情况.结果 74例患者术后伤口均无感染,随访10.1～15.7(12.6±1.27)个月.Bold钉组肘关节评分高于微型钢板组、VAS评分低于微型钢板组、疗效优于微型钢板组,两组患者比较差异均有统计学意义(均P＜0.05),但两组患者术后肘关节活范围比较差异均无统计学意义(均P＞0.05).结论 采用Bold钉治疗Mason Ⅱ、Ⅲ型桡骨头骨折,复位满意、方法简单、创伤较小、固定牢靠,相对于微型钢板疗效更好.