Comparison of the Therapeutic Effect of Intramedullary Fixation and Medullary External Fixation on Evans-Jensen Type Ⅲ Intertrochanteric Fracture_West China Medical Journal

Authors：

 XIAOLiu-bin , FUZhao-xia , WANGQing-hua , LAIJun-cheng , HUGuang-ping

Department of Orthopaedics, the People's Hospital of Longhua District, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518109, P. R. China;

Corresponding author：

Keywords：

Intertrochanteric fracture; Dynamic hip screw plate; Locking compression plate; Gamma nail; Proximal femoral nail anti-rotation

DOI：

10.7507/1002-0179.20140613

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To compare the therapeutic effect between intramedullary fixation and external fixation on intertrochanteric fracture. Methods Between June 2005 and June 2011, 32 patients with Evans-Jensen type Ⅲ intertrochanteric fracture were treated with proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA), Gamma nail, dynamic hip screw plate (DHS) or locking compression plate (LCP), separately. The operation duration, peri-operative bleeding, load time, Harris hip score and postoperative complications were observed in the patients, and were used to analyze the therapeutic effect among the four methods. Results Shorter operation duration, less bleeding in the surgery, smaller quantity of drainage after the operation (P<0.05) were found in group Gamma and group PFNA compared with those in group DHS and LCP. The duration of hospitalization didn't differ much between the two fixation systems (P>0.05). The difference in operation duration, operative bleeding and post-operative drainage between group Gamma and PFNA, and between group DHS and LCP was not significant (P>0.05). Conclusion The intramedullary fixation was better than external fixation for Evans-Jensen type Ⅲ intertrochanteric fracture.

Citation： XIAOLiu-bin, FUZhao-xia, WANGQing-hua, LAIJun-cheng, HUGuang-ping. Comparison of the Therapeutic Effect of Intramedullary Fixation and Medullary External Fixation on Evans-Jensen Type Ⅲ Intertrochanteric Fracture. West China Medical Journal, 2014, 29(11): 2023-2027. doi: 10.7507/1002-0179.20140613 Copy

1.	冯济陈, 张金福, 黄正霜, 等. 股骨近端锁定钢板加拉力螺钉治疗老年骨质疏松性股骨转子间骨折31例分析[J]. 浙江医学, 2014, 8(13):1176-1177.
2.	Canale ST, Beaty JH. 坎贝尔骨科手术学[M]. 11版. 王岩, 陈继营, 周勇刚, 等, 译. 北京:人民军医出版社, 2009:2358.
3.	王俊杰. 股骨转子间骨折的不同手术治疗效果分析[J]. 中国医学工程, 2014, 22(6):25, 27.
4.	邢彬. 锁定加压钢板与股骨近端防旋髓内钉治疗不稳定股骨转子间骨折的临床疗效分析[J]. 中国医师进修杂志, 2014, 37(14):42-44.
5.	Evans EM. The treatment of trochanteric fractures of the femur[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1949, 31B(2):190-203.
6.	郝伟, 王新, 周路纲, 等. 老年股骨转子间骨折不同治疗方法对比研究[J].中华实验外科杂志, 2014, 31(6):1362-1364.
7.	陈胜伟. DHS和PFNA治疗老年股骨转子间骨折的临床效果对比分析[J]. 甘肃医药, 2014, 33(7):543-545.
8.	柏冰, 侯志勇. 不同内固定方法在绝经后股骨转子间骨折患者中的应用[J]. 海南医学, 2014, 2(13):1921-1923.
9.	张晓铭, 邹鹏. 2种不同方法治疗不稳定型股骨转子间骨折的比较[J]. 中国伤残医学, 2014, 22(11):47-48.
10.	江庭彪, 郑豪芬. DCS治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折26例临床分析[J]. 中国实用医药, 2011, 6(10):48-49.
11.	曾昭勋, 陈宗雄, 邱俊钦. 不同固定方法治疗老年股骨转子间骨折疗效比较[J]. 临床骨科杂志, 2011, 14(3):302-304.
12.	江伟, 刘跃洪, 杨灵, 等. 股骨近端锁定钢板与Gamma3治疗稳定型股骨转子间骨折的生物力学比较研究[J]. 中国修复重建外科杂志, 2014, 28(9):1095-1098.
13.	林杨景, 李杰, 林炎水, 等. InterTAN、PFNA和DHS治疗股骨转子间骨折的疗效比较[J]. 暨南大学学报·自然科学与医学版, 2014, 35(3):294-298.
14.	文浩, 段戡, 袁长深, 等. 股骨近端锁定钢板与动力髋螺钉修复股骨转子间骨折的系统评价[J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2014, 18(35):5715-5722.
15.	章光峰, 张军, 张明永, 等. 187例股骨转子间骨折手术经验总结[J]. 卫生职业教育, 2011, 29(11):129-132.
16.	杨国跃, 江汉, 韩立强, 等. PFNA治疗老年外侧壁不完整型股骨转子间骨折的疗效分析[J]. 天津医药, 2014, 42(7):713-715.

1. 冯济陈, 张金福, 黄正霜, 等. 股骨近端锁定钢板加拉力螺钉治疗老年骨质疏松性股骨转子间骨折31例分析[J]. 浙江医学, 2014, 8(13):1176-1177.
2. Canale ST, Beaty JH. 坎贝尔骨科手术学[M]. 11版. 王岩, 陈继营, 周勇刚, 等, 译. 北京:人民军医出版社, 2009:2358.
3. 王俊杰. 股骨转子间骨折的不同手术治疗效果分析[J]. 中国医学工程, 2014, 22(6):25, 27.
4. 邢彬. 锁定加压钢板与股骨近端防旋髓内钉治疗不稳定股骨转子间骨折的临床疗效分析[J]. 中国医师进修杂志, 2014, 37(14):42-44.
5. Evans EM. The treatment of trochanteric fractures of the femur[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1949, 31B(2):190-203.
6. 郝伟, 王新, 周路纲, 等. 老年股骨转子间骨折不同治疗方法对比研究[J].中华实验外科杂志, 2014, 31(6):1362-1364.
7. 陈胜伟. DHS和PFNA治疗老年股骨转子间骨折的临床效果对比分析[J]. 甘肃医药, 2014, 33(7):543-545.
8. 柏冰, 侯志勇. 不同内固定方法在绝经后股骨转子间骨折患者中的应用[J]. 海南医学, 2014, 2(13):1921-1923.
9. 张晓铭, 邹鹏. 2种不同方法治疗不稳定型股骨转子间骨折的比较[J]. 中国伤残医学, 2014, 22(11):47-48.
10. 江庭彪, 郑豪芬. DCS治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折26例临床分析[J]. 中国实用医药, 2011, 6(10):48-49.
11. 曾昭勋, 陈宗雄, 邱俊钦. 不同固定方法治疗老年股骨转子间骨折疗效比较[J]. 临床骨科杂志, 2011, 14(3):302-304.
12. 江伟, 刘跃洪, 杨灵, 等. 股骨近端锁定钢板与Gamma3治疗稳定型股骨转子间骨折的生物力学比较研究[J]. 中国修复重建外科杂志, 2014, 28(9):1095-1098.
13. 林杨景, 李杰, 林炎水, 等. InterTAN、PFNA和DHS治疗股骨转子间骨折的疗效比较[J]. 暨南大学学报·自然科学与医学版, 2014, 35(3):294-298.
14. 文浩, 段戡, 袁长深, 等. 股骨近端锁定钢板与动力髋螺钉修复股骨转子间骨折的系统评价[J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2014, 18(35):5715-5722.
15. 章光峰, 张军, 张明永, 等. 187例股骨转子间骨折手术经验总结[J]. 卫生职业教育, 2011, 29(11):129-132.
16. 杨国跃, 江汉, 韩立强, 等. PFNA治疗老年外侧壁不完整型股骨转子间骨折的疗效分析[J]. 天津医药, 2014, 42(7):713-715.

Previous Article
Clinical Comprehensive Analysis of Diffuse Panbronchiolitis
Next Article
Biomechanics Research of Surgical Internal Fixation Methods for General Floating Shoulder Injury

West China Medical Journal

Comparison of the Therapeutic Effect of Intramedullary Fixation and Medullary External Fixation on Evans-Jensen Type Ⅲ Intertrochanteric Fracture

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content