临床外科杂志 ›› 2019, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (9): 788-790.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-6483.2019.09.022

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

前交叉韧带止点撕脱性骨折关节镜下交叉不可吸收缝线固定与空芯螺钉固定的临床对比分析

  

  1. 武汉科技大学附属汉阳医院骨科
  • 出版日期:2019-09-20 发布日期:2019-09-20

A clinical comparative study:tibial avulsion fracture of the anterior cruciate ligament fixation through decussate nonabsorbable suture versus cannulated screw under arthroscopic

  • Online:2019-09-20 Published:2019-09-20

摘要: 目的:比较关节镜下使用不可吸收的缝线在交叉韧带前方交叉后引出关节外固定和关节镜下空芯螺钉内固定对膝关节前交叉韧带止点撕脱性骨折治疗的临床临床疗效。方法:前交叉韧带止点撕脱性骨折病人30膝,随机分为两组,实验组15膝,行关节镜下不可吸收缝线固定术,对照组15膝,行膝关节镜下空芯螺钉固定术,对比两组前抽屉试验(ADT)、拉赫曼试验、Lysholm评分、国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)主观评分、手术时间、术后1周内镇痛药物使用总量、住院费用。结果:两种手术方式病人在术后膝关节疼痛和关节活动方面较手术前明显改善(P<0.05)。在最后的随访中Lysholm和IKDC主观评分均有改善(P<0.05)。实验组手术时间(75.40±10.32)分钟、术后镇痛药物用量(19.33±10.33)mg、住院花费(7555.56±1643.02)元;对照组分别为(88.67±12.84)分钟、(29.00±10.39)mg、(20127.91±1277.23)元,两组比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:关节镜下不可吸收缝线固定和空芯钉固定在治疗前交叉韧带止点撕脱性骨折治疗的临床疗效一致,但前者手术时间、术后镇痛药物用量、住院花费上更少。

关键词: 前交叉韧带;关节镜;缝合, 撕脱骨折

Abstract: Objective:To compare clinical outcomes of arthroscopic therapy for tibial avulsion fracture with nonabsorbable suture and cannulated screw.Methods:30 cases for tibial avulsion fracture patients were treated with nonabsorbable suture fixation or cannulated screw fixation under arthroscopy.Among these patients,the experimental group was15 knees with nonabsorbable suture fixation under knee arthroscopy,and the control group was 15 knees with traditional hollow screw fixation under knee arthroscopy.Radiographs,anterior drawertest(ADT),Lachman test,Lysholm score,Visual analog Pain Score ,International Knee Documentation Committee(IKDC)subjective score,operation time,analgesic dosage of postoperation 1 week and hospitalization expense were employed to evaluate clinical outcomes in followup.Results:Two groups of patients had improved significantly in knee function and pain relief compared with the preoperative state(P<0.05).Both Lysholm and IKDC subjective scores improved at the last followup(P<0.05).Experimental group[(75.40±10.32)min,(19.33±10.33)mg,(7555.56±1643.02)yuan] were less than control group[(88.67±12.84)min,(29.00±10.39)mg,(20127.91±1277.23)yuan] on aspect of operation time,analgesic dosage of postoperation 1 week and hospitalization expense(P<0.05).〖WTHZ〗Conclusion:Nonabsorbable suture fixation and cannulated screw fixation areequivalent techniques in terms of the clinical efficacy of arthroscopic tibial avulsion fracture treatment.But,Nonabsorbable suture fixation are less than cannulated screw fixation on aspect of operation time,analgesic dosage of postoperation 1 week and hospitalization expense.

Key words: anterior cruciate ligament, arthroscopy, suture, avulsion fracture

No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 李绍春, 涂彦渊, 唐健雄. 机器人手术时代对疝外科的挑战[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(9): 731 -733 .
[2] 秦昌富, 陈杰, 申英末等. 中国疝病注册登记随访系统对我国疝和腹壁外科的推动作用[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(9): 734 -736 .
[3] 李健文, 唐健雄. 疝外科缝合技术与缝合材料选择中国专家共识(2018版)解读[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(9): 737 -739 .
[4] 顾岩, 杨建军, 宋致成等. 腹壁疝组织结构分离技术的进展和改革[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(9): 739 -742 .
[5] 闵凯, 吴彪. 复杂腹壁疝修补手术的选择和技术改进前景[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(9): 743 -744 .
[6] 陈双, 周太成. 食管裂孔疝解剖学观点[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(9): 745 -747 .
[7] 罗文, 段鑫, 柯文杰等. 疝修补术后慢性疼痛的临床特征和诊断治疗[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(9): 748 -750 .
[8] 刘鹭, 穆磊, 周毅. 腹股沟疝无张力修补术后补片感染的诊疗分析[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(9): 751 -753 .
[9] 陈华涛, 邵永胜, 李晓辉等. 伴有同侧全髋关节置换手术史的腹股沟疝手术术式的选择[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(9): 754 -756 .
[10] 王波:彭美红:江海等. 腹腔镜治疗成人Morgagni疝致肠梗阻一例[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(9): 756 -757 .