川北医学院学报2017，Vol.32Issue(4)：491-494,4.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-3697.2017.04.003
三联微创切口与传统"L"外侧切口治疗跟骨骨折疗效对比
Comparison with triple minimally incision and traditional "L" incision for calcaneal fracture
摘要
Abstract
Objective:To provide a new method for calcaneal fractures by comparing the different kinds of incision.Methods:48 cases of calcaneal fracture,9 cases of sanders I ,15 cases of sanders II,18 cases of sanders Ⅲ,6 cases of sanders IV,and randomly divided into minimally group and traditional group were treated and followed up in 12 months.The average waiting time,average operation time,postoperative functional recovery and complications were compared.Results:There was a significant difference between two groups in average preoperative waiting time (P<0.001) and the waiting time of the minimally group was(133±66)h,which was shorter than (247±52) h of the traditional group.The recovery of 2 groups of patients' B(o)lher angle and Gissane angle had no significant difference.Although there was no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of skin flap necrosis (minimally group was 0%,traditional group 17.65%) and infection rate (minimally group was 0%,traditional group 5.88%),but the incidence rate of minimally group was lower than that of the traditional group.There was no significant difference in postoperative functional recovery between the two groups (P=0.986),but in the traditional group,there were 1 patient who complained about the appearance of the flap after the flap operation.Conclusion:The minimally incision for calcaneal fractures is superior to the traditional "L" type lateral incision.It is a new way to be popularized.关键词
三联微创切口/跟骨骨折Key words
Triple Minimally Incision/Calcaneal Fracture分类
医药卫生引用本文复制引用
夏羿凡,蒋科,郭建平,周朝东..三联微创切口与传统"L"外侧切口治疗跟骨骨折疗效对比[J].川北医学院学报,2017,32(4):491-494,4.基金项目
重庆市卫生和计划生育委员会资助项目(2015ZBXM092) （2015ZBXM092）
