首页> 外文OA文献 >Unlocked nailing vs. interlocking nailing for winquist type I and II femoral isthmus fractures. is there a difference?
【2h】

Unlocked nailing vs. interlocking nailing for winquist type I and II femoral isthmus fractures. is there a difference?

机译:温克斯特I型和II型股峡峡部骨折的开锁钉与互锁钉。有区别吗?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Interlocking intramedullary nailing is suitable for comminuted femoral isthmus fractures, but for noncomminuted fractures its benefit over unlocked nailing is debatable. This study was undertaken to compare outcomes of interlocking nailing versus unlocked intramedullary nailing in such fractures. Ninety-three cases of noncomminuted femoral isthmus fractures (Winquist I and II) treated with interlocking nailing and unlocked nailing from 1 June 2004 to 1 June 2005 were reviewed; radiological and clinical union rates, bony alignment, complication and knee function were investigated. There was no statistical significant difference with regard to union rate, implant failure, infection and fracture alignment in both study groups. Open fixation with unlocked femoral nailing is technically less demanding and requires less operating time; additionally, there is no exposure to radiation and cost of the implant is cheaper. We therefore conclude that unlocked nailing is still useful for the management of non-comminuted isthmus fractures of the femur.
机译:交锁髓内钉适合于粉碎性股峡峡部骨折,但对于非粉碎性骨折,其与非锁定性钉相比的益处尚待商bat。进行这项研究的目的是比较此类骨折中互锁钉与解锁髓内钉的疗效。回顾2004年6月1日至2005年6月1日共收治的93例无粉碎性股骨峡部骨折(Winquist I和II),均采用互锁钉和非锁定钉治疗。影像学和临床联合率,骨对齐,并发症和膝盖功能进行了调查。在两个研究组中,在联合率,植入失败,感染和骨折对准方面无统计学差异。从技术上讲,带解锁股骨钉的开放固定术要求不高,需要的手术时间也更少。另外,没有暴露于辐射并且植入物的成本更便宜。因此,我们得出的结论是,未锁定的钉子仍可用于治疗股骨的非粉碎性峡部骨折。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

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