桥接组合式内固定与金属锁定接骨板钉系统修复股骨干骨折的生物力学比较

发布时间：2018-03-13 10:39

  本文选题：股骨骨折　切入点：骨钉　出处：《中国组织工程研究》2016年17期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：背景:临床对股骨干骨折进行修复的过程中,可以选择不同内固定方式,包括桥接组合式内固定系统与金属锁定接骨板钉系统。目的:比较桥接组合式内固定系统与金属锁定接骨板钉系统固定股骨干骨折的生物力学特性。方法:收集18个股骨标本,随机分为3组,每组6个,其中正常对照组不作任何处理,其余两组制备股骨干骨折模型,桥接组合组行桥接组合式内固定,接骨板钉系统组行金属锁定接骨板钉系统内固定。对3组标本进行生物力学测试,通过股骨压缩实验记录3组最大载荷500 N作用下的最大位移;通过股骨前屈实验记录3组最大载荷100 N作用下的最大位移;通过股骨后屈实验记录3组最大载荷100 N作用下的最大位移。结果与结论:1不同载荷下压缩实验:桥接组合组和接骨板钉系统组的最大位移均大于正常对照组,其中在最大载荷500 N下,桥接组合组和接骨板钉系统组的最大位移均显著大于正常对照组(P0.05);且桥接组合组显著小于接骨板钉系统组(P0.05);2不同载荷下前屈实验:桥接组合组和接骨板钉系统组的最大位移均大于正常对照组,其中在最大载荷100 N下,桥接组合组和接骨板钉系统组的最大位移均显著大于正常对照组(P0.05);且桥接组合组显著小于接骨板钉系统组(P0.05);3不同载荷下后屈实验:桥接组合组和接骨板钉系统组的最大位移均大于正常对照组,其中在最大载荷100 N下,桥接组合组和接骨板钉系统组的最大位移均显著大于正常对照组(P0.05);且桥接组合组显著小于接骨板钉系统组(P0.05);4结果表明,体外模拟股骨干骨折桥接组合式内固定系统与金属锁定接骨板钉系统均能获得一定的固定效果,设计符合生物力学原理,其中桥接组合式内固定在压应力以及前屈、后屈应力作用下,均可以保持较小的位移,提示具有较好的变形抵抗能力。
[Abstract]:Background: in the process of repairing femoral shaft fracture, different internal fixation methods can be selected. Including bridged composite internal fixation system and metal locking plate nail system. Objective: to compare the biomechanical characteristics of bridging combined internal fixation system and metal locking plate nail system for femoral shaft fracture. Methods: 18 femoral specimens were collected. The rats were randomly divided into 3 groups, 6 in each group, in which the normal control group was not treated with any treatment, the other two groups were used to establish femoral shaft fracture model, and the bridged combined internal fixation was performed in the bridging combination group. The internal fixation of metal locking plate nail system was performed in the group of plate nail system. Biomechanical tests were carried out on the three groups of specimens. The maximum displacement of the three groups under the action of 500 N under the maximum load was recorded by femoral compression experiment. The maximal displacement of 3 groups under 100 N maximum load was recorded by femur forward flexion experiment. Results and conclusion the maximum displacement of the bridging group and the plate nail system group was higher than that of the normal control group under different loads, and the maximum displacement of the three groups was recorded by the femur flexion test under the maximum load of 100 N. results and conclusions: the maximum displacement of the bridging group and the plate nail system group was higher than that of the normal control group. Under the maximum load of 500N, The maximum displacement of the bridging group and the plate nail system group were significantly higher than that of the normal control group (P 0.05), and the bridging combination group was significantly smaller than that of the plate nail system group (P 0.05) under different loads: the bridging combination group and the plate nail system group were significantly less than those of the bridge group and the plate nail system group under different loads. The maximum displacement was higher than that in the normal control group. Where the maximum load is 100 N, The maximum displacement of the bridging group and the plate nail system group were significantly higher than that of the normal control group (P 0.05), and the bridge combination group was significantly smaller than the plate nail system group (P 0.05) under different loads: the bridge combination group and the plate nail system group were significantly less than those of the bridge group and the plate nail system group under different loads. The maximum displacement was higher than that in the normal control group. Under the maximum load of 100N, the maximum displacement of the bridging group and the plate nail system group was significantly higher than that of the normal control group (P 0.05), and the bridge group was significantly smaller than the plate nail system group (P 0.05), the results showed that the maximum displacement of the bridging group was significantly higher than that of the normal control group (P 0.05). In vitro, the combined internal fixation system and the metal locking plate fixation system for femoral shaft fracture can obtain certain fixation effect. The design accords with the biomechanical principle, in which the bridge combined internal fixation system is under compressive stress and forward flexion. Under the action of post-flexion stress, the displacement can be kept small, which indicates that the deformation resistance is better.
【作者单位】： 郑州市骨科医院下肢骨科Ⅰ;
【分类号】：R687.3

【相似文献】

相关期刊论文 前10条

1 孙晓保,祝天经;U形接骨板承载能力的实验研究[J];医用生物力学;2002年02期

2 黄海波,李凡;髁支持接骨板的断裂失效分析[J];电子显微学报;2004年04期

3 祝天经;孙晓保;陈宏;罗长斌;;自制改良U形接骨板的承载能力(英文)[J];中国组织工程研究与临床康复;2008年22期

4 王卫平，赵永兴，，杨新佑，刘家明;U形接骨板临床应用20例体会[J];湖南医学;1994年S1期

5 阮兴隆,杜传琴;西脉冲记忆接骨板治疗锁骨中段骨折21例[J];现代中西医结合杂志;2000年24期

6 李福,隋福革,罗民,李树义,武汉,马洪顺;拱形交叉固定接骨板的设计与应用分析[J];中国骨伤;2001年01期

7 李兰锁,李志平,党海丰;角翼接骨板在肱骨不稳定性骨折中的应用[J];实用骨科杂志;2002年01期

8 吕迎丽,王永珍,孙孝红;应用记忆接骨板行骨折内固定的手术配合[J];内蒙古中医药;2004年01期

9 王成江;;小切口技术在取四肢接骨板中的应用[J];中国全科医学;2007年06期

10 王志彬;;重建型钛质接骨板治疗锁骨折23例临床分析[J];中国煤炭工业医学杂志;2008年05期

相关会议论文 前10条

1 黄海波;李凡;;髁支持接骨板的断裂失效分析[A];第十三届全国电子显微学会议论文集[C];2004年

2 管学懋;李林;樊晓峰;戴云飞;;T型接骨板加肋骨线治疗桡骨远端粉碎性骨折12例疗效分析[A];第七届全国创伤学术会议暨2009海峡两岸创伤医学论坛论文汇编[C];2009年

3 谢杨;张秋林;王秋根;纪方;许硕贵;邓迎生;;锁定接骨板在骨不连治疗中的临床应用[A];泛长江流域骨科新进展暨第九届全国骨科护理研讨会论文汇编[C];2007年

4 张维;;记忆接骨板治疗髌骨骨折的护理体会[A];玉溪市第二届骨科学术研讨及科技成果推广会论文汇编[C];2005年

5 阮朝阳;何永清;;锁定接骨板应用误区及内固定失败原因分析[A];2009年浙江省骨科学学术年会论文汇编[C];2009年

6 赵炳辉;王金武;李明华;孙贵新;郭尚春;;多层CT对生物活性接骨板骨折固定及愈合效果的评价[A];2006年上海市医用生物材料研讨会论文汇编[C];2006年

7 包崇云;谭言飞;曹阳;王力平;田卫东;李声伟;张兴栋;;表面活性坚强内固定钛接骨板的研制[A];第三届全国口腔颌面部创伤暨修复重建学术研讨会论文汇编[C];2003年

8 谷友泉;董黎敏;高亚磊;陈伟;刘念;叶金铎;张春秋;;微创接骨板系统的三维有限元分析[A];第十届全国生物力学学术会议暨第十二届全国生物流变学学术会议论文摘要汇编[C];2012年

9 林修素;林立中;;异型接骨板在小动物骨折内固定手术中的应用[A];2010年福建省畜牧兽医学术年会论文集[C];2010年

10 邹江涛;;肱骨锁定接骨板在老年肱骨近端骨折治疗中的运用[A];第十九届全国中西医结合骨伤科学术研讨会论文汇编[C];2012年

相关重要报纸文章 前1条

1 湘雅医院教授 胡懿惷　硕士 戴子勋;接骨板[N];大众卫生报;2011年

相关硕士学位论文 前10条

1 吴泽海;同种异体接骨板联合可吸收材料治疗骨折有限元分析及力学试验[D];天津理工大学;2015年

2 梁炜;锁骨个性化锁定接骨板模型的建立及有限元分析[D];山西医科大学;2015年

3 殷兵;自定位微创接骨板与微创内固定系统治疗胫骨骨折的对比[D];河北医科大学;2011年

4 李U

本文编号：1606024