ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:The current fixation methods for clavicle fracture are mainly anatomy plate or reconstruction plate. The specific devices for maintaining fracture alignment and fixation are rarely reported. The majority of physicians prefer reduction forceps to maintain fracture alignment and retain plate for internal fixation. However, reduction forceps have many disadvantages, such as large damage, instable fixation and difficult to bend or mould plates. OBJECTIVE:To compare the clinical effect of new-style bone holder and reduction forceps in treatment of clavicular fractures. METHODA total of 75 patients with clavicular fractures were recruited from Department of Orthopedics, Huai’an First Hospital, Affiliated to Nanjing Medical University, between December 2011 and December 2013. The involved patients were randomly divided into two groups, new-style bone holder (39 cases) and reduction forceps (36 cases). In new-style bone holder group, the wounds were opened and reduced using reduction forceps, then new-style bone holder was applied to maintain fracture alignment and internal fixation;in reduction forceps group, the wounds were opened and reduced using reduction forceps, then reduction forceps was applied to maintain fracture alignment and internal fixation. The length of incision, the time of operation, intraoperative blood loss, fracture healing time and clinical efficacy in two groups were compared. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:Al cases were fol owed up for over half a year. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the length of incision (P>0.05). The new-style bone holder group was obviously better than reduction forceps group in the time of operation, intraoperative blood loss and fracture healing time, with significant difference (P<0.01). The clinical efficacy was significantly higher than reduction forceps group. Experimental findings indicate that, new-style bone holder is characterized by simple operation, few trauma, stable fixation, short operation time, and rapid fracture healing.
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the clinical effect of tube bone fractures with a modified bone holding and the traditional three -claw bone holding. Methods 94 cases of tube bone fractures were compared based on their sequence,the odd number (group A) were treated with the modified bone holding; the even number (group B) were treated with the traditional three-claw bone holding; and then the length of incision,the time of operation,the lost blood during the operation,the reduction of those fractures,the time for those fractures to get cicatrization were compared. Results All cases were followed up over half a year,which was no significant difference between the two groups in the reduction of those fractures. The group A had significant advantages than group B in the length of incision,the time of operation,the lost blood during the operation,the time for those fractures to get cicatrization. Conclusion The modified bone holding is better than the traditional three-claw bone holding in the length of incision,the time of operation,the lost blood during the operation,the time for those fractures to get cicatrization.