Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters








Language
Year range
1.
China Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology ; (12): 247-251, 2017.
Article in Chinese | WPRIM | ID: wpr-281327

ABSTRACT

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To observe the biomechanical effects of the lateral wall of the femur in treating femoral intertrochanteric fractures with intramedullary or extramedullary fixation to guide the choice of clinical fixed methods.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Twelve adults femur specimens of intertrochanteric fractures were belong to the type A1 of the AO fracture classification and randomly divided into the lateral wall complete PFNA group, the lateral wall complete PF-LCP group, the lateral wall breakage PFNA group, lateral wall breakage PF-LCP group, every group had 3 specimens. The four groups of specimens were subjected to compressive loading experiment with Universal Material Testing Machine. The maximum loading force was observed. The distance between fracture ends, the distance of fracture dislocation and the sliding distance of the fracture fragments along the intertrochanteric were measured with Calipers.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The maximum loading force of lateral wall complete PFNA group were larger than that of lateral wall complete PF-LCP group, and the maximum loading force of lateral wall breakage PFNA group were larger than that of lateral wall breakage PF-LCP group, there were significant differences (<0.05). The distance between fracture ends of the four groups before compression were not significant differences(>0.05). The distance between fracture ends, the distance of fracture dislocation and the sliding distance of the fracture fragments were not significant differences between lateral wall complete PFNA group and lateral wall complete PF-LCP group after compression (>0.05). But the distance between fracture ends, the distance of fracture dislocation and the sliding distance of the fracture fragments of lateral wall breakage PFNA group were less than that of lateral wall breakage PF-LCP group(<0.05).</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>Intramedullary fixation of intertrochanteric fractures have stronger loading force. Both intramedullary and extramedullary fixation of intertrochanteric fractures have strong stability when the lateral wall of the femur is complete, but intramedullary fixation of intertrochanteric fractures is stronger stability than extramedullary fixation when the lateral wall of the femur is broken. So the intramedullary fixation is the first choice for the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture.</p>

2.
China Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology ; (12): 980-985, 2014.
Article in Chinese | WPRIM | ID: wpr-249240

ABSTRACT

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To compare clinical outcomes of swing shoulder and internal fixation in treating proximal humeral fractures.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>From June 2007 to June 2012, totally 89 elderly patients with humeral proximal fractures were treated by swing of shoulder or internal fixation, and 81 patients were followed up. In swing shoulder group, there were 38 patients including 13 males and 25 females aged from 62 to 84 with an average of (67.11±6.18) years old; 27 cases were 2-part fractures and 11 cases were 3-part fractures according to Neer classfication. In internal fixation group, there were 43 patients including 16 males and 27 females aged from 60 to 80 with an average of (66.47±5.48) years old; and 29 cases were 2-part fractures and 14 cases were 3-part fractures according to Neer classfication. VAS score and complications were compared between two groups after treatment, and Constant-Murley functional scoring was used to evaluate shoulder function of patients.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Eighty-one patients were followed up from 13 to 26 months with an average of 18.3 months. There was no significant difference in preoperative VAS score between two groups. After treatment, VAS score in swing shoulder group was (3.11±0.95), and (3.88±1.14) in internal fixation group, and had significant difference between two groups (t=-3.313,P<0.05). There was no significant difference in Constant-Murley scores between swing shoulder group (79.53±3.73) and internal fixation group (77.98±4.11) (t=1.768,P>0.05). Postoperative complications in swing shoulder group was 18.4%(7/38), 39.5%(17/43) in internal fixation group, and had significant differences between two groups (χ2=4.313,P<0.05).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>Swing shoulder for the treatment of proximal humeral fractures in elderly has advantages of low cost, less complications and good recovery of joint function; while internal fixation has a good therapeutic effect but increased complications.</p>


Subject(s)
Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Fracture Fixation, Internal , Methods , Manipulation, Orthopedic , Methods , Shoulder Fractures , Therapeutics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL