...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of orthopaedic trauma >Pertrochanteric fractures: is there an advantage to an intramedullary nail?: a randomized, prospective study of 206 patients comparing the dynamic hip screw and proximal femoral nail.
【24h】

Pertrochanteric fractures: is there an advantage to an intramedullary nail?: a randomized, prospective study of 206 patients comparing the dynamic hip screw and proximal femoral nail.

机译:股骨转子周围骨折:髓内钉是否有优势?:一项针对206位患者的前瞻性随机研究,比较了动态髋螺钉和股骨近端钉。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: To compare the results between a sliding compression hip screw and an intramedullary nail in the treatment of pertrochanteric fractures. DESIGN: Prospective computer-generated randomization of 206 patients into two study groups: those treated by sliding compression hip screw (Group 1; n = 106) and those treated by intramedullary nailing (Group 2; n = 100). SETTING: University Level I trauma center. PATIENTS: All patients over the age of fifty-five years presenting with fractures of the trochanteric region caused by a low-energy injury, classified as AO/OTA Type 31-A1 and A2. INTERVENTION: Treatment with a sliding compression hip screw (Dynamic Hip Screw; Synthes-Stratec, Oberdorf, Switzerland) or an intramedullary nail (Proximal Femoral Nail; Synthes-Stratec, Oberdorf, Switzerland). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Intraoperative: operative and fluoroscopy times, the difficulty of the operation, intraoperative complications, and blood loss. Radiologic: fracture healing and failure of fixation. Clinical: pain, social functioning score, and mobility score. RESULTS: The minimum follow-up was one year. We did not find any statistically significant difference, intraoperatively, radiologically, or clinically, between the two groups of patients. CONCLUSIONS: There is no advantage to an intramedullary nail versus a sliding compression hip screw for low-energy pertrochanteric fractures AO/OTA 31-A1 and A2, specifically with its increased cost and lack of evidence to show decreased complications or improved patient outcome.
机译:目的:比较滑动加压髋螺钉和髓内钉治疗股骨转子周围骨折的结果。设计:前瞻性计算机生成的206例患者随机分为两个研究组:通过滑动加压髋螺钉治疗的患者(第1组; n = 106)和通过髓内钉治疗的患者(第2组; n = 100)。地点:大学一级创伤中心。患者:所有五十五岁以上因低能量损伤而导致的股骨转子区骨折的患者,被分类为AO / OTA类型31-A1和A2。干预:用滑动加压髋螺钉(动力髋螺钉;瑞士奥伯多夫的Synthes-Stratec)或髓内钉(股骨指甲;瑞士奥伯多夫的Synthes-Stratec)进行治疗。主要观察指标:术中:手术和透视检查时间,手术难度,术中并发症和失血量。放射学:骨折愈合和固定失败。临床:疼痛,社交功能评分和活动能力评分。结果:最低随访时间为一年。我们在两组患者的术中,放射学或临床上均未发现任何统计学上的显着差异。结论:髓内钉与滑动加压髋螺钉相比,对于低能量股骨转子周围骨折AO / OTA 31-A1和A2没有优势,特别是其成本增加且缺乏证据表明并发症减少或患者预后得到改善。

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