动力髋螺钉与股骨近端髓内钉内固定治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效对比

李飞

（陕西省府谷县人民医院骨科，陕西 榆林，719400）

浏览次数：87次 下载次数：490次

摘要：

目的 比较动力髋螺钉（DHS）与股骨近端髓内钉（PFN）内固定治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效。方法 回顾性分析我院238例老年股骨粗隆间骨折患者的临床资料，根据内固定治疗方式的不同将其分为DHS组（n=118）与PFN组（n=120）， 观察比较两组患者的手术情况与临床优良率。结果 PFN组患者的手术时间、切口长度、出血量及术后骨折愈合时间均明显优于DHS组患者（P<0.01）；临床优良率比较，PFN组明显高于DHS 组（P<0.01）。结论 与动力髋螺钉内固定治疗相比，股骨近端髓内钉内固定治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折具有显著的优势，应用价值更高。

关键词：股骨粗隆间骨折；动力髋螺钉内固定；股骨近端髓内钉内固定

中图分类号：R687.3文献标志码：A文章编号：2096-1413(2016)27-0061-02

Clinical effect comparison of dynamic hip screw and proximal femoral nail fixation on elderly patients with intertrochanteric fracture
LI Fei
(Department of Orthopaedics, People`s Hospital of Fugu County, Yulin 719400, China)

ABSTRACT: Objective To compare the clinical effects of dynamic hip screw (DHS) and proximal femoral nail (PFN) in the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture in elderly patients. Methods The clinical data of 238 cases of elderly patients with intertrochanteric fracture were retrospectively analyzed, all the patients were divided into DHS group (n=118) and PFN group (n=120) according to different ways of internal fixation. The operative situations and clinical excellent rate of two groups were compared. Results The operation time, incision length, blood loss and fracture healing time of PFN group were significantly better than those of the DHS group (P<0.01), and the clinical excellent rate of the PFN group was significantly higher than that of the DHS group (P<0.01). Conclusion Compared with dynamic hip screw internal fixation, the internal fixation of proximal femoral nail in the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture in elderly patients has obvious advantages. It has certain value in clinical application.
KEYWORDS: intertrochanteric fracture; dynamic hip screw internal fixation; internal fixation of proximal femoral nail

参考文献：
[1] 刘成功,戚超,张海宁,等.关节置换法与内固定法治疗老年骨质疏松合并股骨粗隆间骨折的临床对比分析[J].现代生物医学进展,2016,16(4):741-743.
[2] 蒋志余,李成存,王强立.3 种内固定方式治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折 的临床分析[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2015,30(6):32-33.
[3] 侯国进,周方,张志山,等.不同内固定方式治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨 折围手术期的失血特点分析[J].北京大学学报:医学版,2013,45(5):738-741.
[4] 解志波,周景,谢振宇,等.PFNA 内固定与半髋置换治疗老年骨质 疏松性股骨粗隆间不稳定型骨折的临床分析[J].泸州医学院学报,2015,38(4):423-426.
[5] 程波,易兴彪,陈维义.Gamma 3 型髓内钉与DHS、股骨近端锁定钢 板内固定治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折的疗效比较[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2015,30(2):143-145.
[6] 方丁,曾义高,陈先洲,等.动力髋螺钉与股骨近端防旋髓内钉内固 定治疗股骨粗隆间骨折疗效分析[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2015,30(8):867-868.
[7] 张金辉,张立海,张里程,等.老年股骨粗隆间骨折股骨近端抗旋髓 内钉和股骨近端髓内钉Inter TAN 的选择和疗效评价[J].中国修复重 建外科杂志,2015,29(5):538-541.
[8] 胡元斌,虞堂云,王静成,等.动力髋螺钉和股骨近端防旋髓内钉治 疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折的疗效比较[J].实用临床医药杂志,2014,18(24):131-132.