有关膝关节复合韧带损伤诊治中的一些问题

膝关节复合韧带损伤最常见的为膝关节前交叉韧带(ACL)合并内侧副韧带(MCL)损伤,其次是后交叉韧带(PCL)合并MCL损伤;ACL合并外侧副韧带(LCL)和ACL合并PCL及MCL损伤。随着目前交通事故的增多和竞技体育运动的普遍开展,膝关节复合韧带损伤亦日趋常见。然而,复合韧带损伤的诊断与治     

缝线锚钉治疗膝关节内侧副韧带附丽点损伤

膝关节内侧副韧带(medial collateral ligament,MCL)损伤临床常见,小腿外展使膝关节突然外翻町引起MCL损伤,多见于高能量的交通伤所致的膝关节多发韧带损伤中.     

缝线锚钉治疗膝关节内侧副韧带附丽点损伤

膝关节内侧副韧带(medial collateral ligament,MCL)损伤临床常见,小腿外展使膝关节突然外翻町引起MCL损伤,多见于高能量的交通伤所致的膝关节多发韧带损伤中.     

缝线锚钉治疗膝关节内侧副韧带附丽点损伤

膝关节内侧副韧带(medial collateral ligament,MCL)损伤临床常见,小腿外展使膝关节突然外翻町引起MCL损伤,多见于高能量的交通伤所致的膝关节多发韧带损伤中.     

缝线锚钉治疗膝关节内侧副韧带附丽点损伤

膝关节内侧副韧带(medial collateral ligament,MCL)损伤临床常见,小腿外展使膝关节突然外翻町引起MCL损伤,多见于高能量的交通伤所致的膝关节多发韧带损伤中.     

缝合锚钉固定半腱肌重建膝关节内侧副韧带治疗Ⅲ度内侧副韧带损伤的疗效分析

正膝关节内侧副韧带(MCL)是膝关节内侧稳定的重要结构之一。MCL损伤是较为常见的膝关节损伤,其中Ⅰ度和Ⅱ度MCL损伤通常采取非手术治疗可以获得较好的治疗效果~([1]),然而Ⅲ度MCL损伤常常合并其他韧带损伤,严重影响膝关节的稳定性,常需手术治疗~([2])。笔者回顾性分析自2017-05—2018-05诊治的64例膝关节Ⅲ度MCL损伤,旨在探讨缝合锚钉固定半腱肌重建膝关节MCL治疗Ⅲ度MCL损伤的临床疗效,报道如下。     

缝线锚钉治疗膝关节内侧副韧带附丽点损伤

膝关节内侧副韧带(medial collateral ligament,MCL)损伤临床常见,小腿外展使膝关节突然外翻町引起MCL损伤,多见于高能量的交通伤所致的膝关节多发韧带损伤中.     

缝线锚钉治疗膝关节内侧副韧带附丽点损伤

膝关节内侧副韧带(medial collateral ligament,MCL)损伤临床常见,小腿外展使膝关节突然外翻町引起MCL损伤,多见于高能量的交通伤所致的膝关节多发韧带损伤中.     

缝线锚钉治疗膝关节内侧副韧带附丽点损伤

膝关节内侧副韧带(medial collateral ligament,MCL)损伤临床常见,小腿外展使膝关节突然外翻町引起MCL损伤,多见于高能量的交通伤所致的膝关节多发韧带损伤中.     

缝线锚钉治疗膝关节内侧副韧带附丽点损伤

膝关节内侧副韧带(medial collateral ligament,MCL)损伤临床常见,小腿外展使膝关节突然外翻町引起MCL损伤,多见于高能量的交通伤所致的膝关节多发韧带损伤中.     

胸腰椎骨折椎弓根内固定断裂与植骨融合方式的相关性分析

[目的]探讨胸腰椎骨折椎弓根螺钉内固定系统内固定术后,椎弓根螺钉断裂与植骨融合方式之间的关系,以探讨胸腰椎骨折植骨融合的最佳方式。[方法]回顾性研究1995年5月~2005年12月本院脊柱外科收治的胸腰椎骨折病人197例,其中A组单纯内固定(不植骨)患者14例,B组“H”形椎板植骨21例,C组横突间植骨67例,D组椎间、椎内联合横突间植骨95例。[结果]术后随访6~32个月,内固定断裂12例,其中A组4例,B组3例,C组5例,D组0例,4组中D组内固定断裂率显著低于其他3组(P<0.05)。[结论]椎间、椎体内联合横突间植骨重建脊柱三柱的稳定性,符合人体生物力学原理,能有效降低内固定断裂的发生。     

Influence of the design of the prosthesis on the outcome after hemiarthroplasty of the shoulder in displaced fractures of the head of the humerus

We reviewed 39 patients with displaced three- and four-part fractures of the humerus. In 21 patients (group A) we had used an anatomical prosthesis for the humeral head and in 18 (group B) an implant designed for fractures. When followed up at a mean of 29.3 months after surgery the overall Constant score was 51.9 points; in group A it was 51.5 and in group B 52.4 points. The subjective satisfaction of the patients was assessed using a numerical rating scale and was similar in both groups. In group A complete healing of the tuberosities was found in 29% and 50% in group B. Partial integration was seen in 29% of group A and in only one patient in group B, while resorption was noted in 43% of group A and 44% of group B. The functional outcome was significantly better in patients with complete or partial healing of the tuberosities (p=0.022). The specific trauma prosthesis did not lead to better healing of the tuberosities. The difference in clinical outcome obtained by the two designs did not reach statistical significance.