摘要
目的:分析膜诱导(Masquelet)技术与骨搬运(Ilizarov)技术治疗慢性骨髓炎(Chronic os-teomyelitis,CO)的临床疗效.方法:将 85 例 CO 患者采用随机数字表完全随机分为 M 组(n= 42,Mas-quelet技术)与I 组(n=43,Ilizarov 技术).比较两组治疗效果、康复时间、关节功能、生活质量、术后并发症发生情况.结果:I组治疗效果为优良率略高于M组,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).I组骨愈合及完全负重时间较 M 组长(P<0.05).术前两组患者 lowa 膝关节评分、lowa 踝关节评分、WHOQOL-BREF评分比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);术后两组患者 lowa 膝关节评分、lowa 踝关节评分、WHO-QOL-BREF评分均显著高于术前(P<0.05);手术前后两组 lowa 膝关节评分、lowa 踝关节评分、WHO-QOL-BREF评分差值比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).I 组针道感染率高于 M 组(P<0.05).结论:Masquelet技术与Ilizarov技术治疗CO疗效相当,但Masquelet技术对软组织要求较高,且患者需自体供骨量充足,临床中应视具体情况选择.
Abstract
Objective:To compare the clinical efficacy of Masquelet technique and Ilizarov technique in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis(CO).Methods:A total of 85 CO patients were randomly divided into two groups by random number table:M group(n=42,Masquelet technique)and I group(n=43,Ilizarov technique).The treatment effects,rehabilitation time,joint function,quality of life,and postoperative com-plications were compared between the two groups.Results:The excellent and good rate of treatment effect in group I was slightly higher than that in group M(P>0.05).Bone healing time and complete weight-bearing time in group I were longer compared to group M(P<0.05).There were no statistically significant differences in lowa knee score,lowa ankle score and WHOQOL-BREF scores between two groups before surgery(P>0.05),and the above scores in both groups were significantly higher after surgery than those before surgery(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in the changes in the lowa knee score,lowa ankle score,and WHOQOL-BREF score between the two groups before and after surgery(P>0.05).The needle tract infection rate in the I group was higher than that in the M group(P<0.05).Conclusion:Masquelet technology and Il-izarov technology are similar to the efficacy of CO treatment,but Masquelet technology has higher requirements for soft tissues,and patients need to have sufficient self-donor bone mass,which should be selected clinically according to the specific circumstances.
维普
万方数据