微创单髁置换与全膝关节置换治疗膝关节单间室骨性关节炎的效果比较

摘要
图/表
参考文献(20)
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (0 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS) 背景资料

文章导读

摘要目的探讨微创单髁置换与全膝关节置换治疗膝关节单间室骨性关节炎的效果比较。方法选取丰城市人民医院2018年5月～2019年12月收治的膝关节骨性关节炎患者进行回顾性分析，接受微创单髁置换术治疗的30例膝关节单间室骨性关节炎患者（30膝关节）为观察组，接受全膝关节置换术治疗的30例膝关节骨性关节炎患者（30膝关节）为对照组。整理两组术前、术后的相关临床资料，对比两组患者术后症状缓解情况，膝关节功能HSS评分、患者主观满意度、术中失血量、手术时间、住院时间、治疗费用等。结果治疗前两组膝关节功能HSS评分比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；治疗后，观两组的膝关节功能HSS评分均高于治疗前，且观察组高于对照组，差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。观察组术后症状缓解率高于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。观察组主观满意度高于对照组，术中失血量少于对照组，手术时间、住院时间短于对照组，治疗费用少于对照组，差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论微创单髁置换术治疗膝关节单间室骨性关节炎术中创伤小，出血量少，手术时间短，术后患者症状改善明显，未出现明显的并发症，住院费用较全膝置换手术费用低。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	谢静波肖义兵熊俊伟郑涛鄢秋元

关键词 ： , font-size: 16px, text-align: justify, 微创单髁置换')" href="#">">微创单髁置换, 全膝关节置换, 膝关节单间室骨性关节炎, 疗效, 比较

Abstract： Objective To compare the efficacy of minimally invasive single condylar replacement and total knee arthroplasty in the treatment of single compartment osteoarthritis of knee joint.Methods Knee osteoarthritis patients admitted to Fengcheng People′s Hospital from May 2018 to December 2019 were selected for retrospective analysis.A total of 30 patients with single-compartment knee osteoarthritis(30 knee joints)who underwent minimally invasive monocondyle replacement surgery as the observation group,and 30 patients with knee osteoarthritis (30 knee joints) who received total knee arthroplasty as the control group.The relevant clinical data of the two groups before and after the operation were sorted,and the postoperative symptom relief,the HSS score of knee joint function,the subjective satisfaction of the patients,the blood loss during the operation,the operation time,the length of stay,the treatment cost of the two groups were compared.Results There was no significant difference in the HSS scores of knee joint function between the two groups before treatment (P＞0.05);after treatment,the HSS scores of knee joint function in both groups were higher than those before treatment,and the observation group was higher than the control group,the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05).The postoperative symptom relief rate of the observation group was higher than that of the control group,the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05).The subjective satisfaction of the observation group was higher than that of the control group,the blood loss during operation was less than that of the control group,the operation time and hospital stay were shorter than those of the control group,and the treatment cost was lower than that of the control group,the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05).Conclusion Minimally invasive single condyle replacement for single-compartment knee osteoarthritis has less trauma,less bleeding,and shorter operation time.Postoperative symptoms have improved significantly,no obvious complications occurred,and hospitalization costs are lower than total knee replacement surgery.

Key words： font-size: 16px Minimally invasive unicondylar replacement;Total knee arthroplasty;Single compartment osteoarthritis of knee joint;Curative effect;Comparison')" href="#">text-align: justify;">Minimally invasive unicondylar replacement;Total knee arthroplasty;Single compartment osteoarthritis of knee joint;Curative effect;Comparison

PACS:

基金资助:

引用本文:

谢静波肖义兵熊俊伟郑涛鄢秋元. 微创单髁置换与全膝关节置换治疗膝关节单间室骨性关节炎的效果比较[J]. 中国当代医药, 2020, 27(32): 32-35.
XIE Jing-bo XIAO Yi-bing XIONG Jun-wei ZHENG Tao YAN Qiu-yuan. Effect comparison of minimally invasive single condylar replacement and total knee arthroplasty in the treatment of single compartment osteoarthritis of knee joint. 中国当代医药, 2020, 27(32): 32-35.

链接本文:

https://www.dangdaiyiyao.com/CN/ 或 https://www.dangdaiyiyao.com/CN/Y2020/V27/I32/32

[1]	郭珀宏，刘日新，刘万新，等.UKA与TKA 治疗中国地区中老年人膝单间室骨关节炎疗效对比的Meta分析[J].当代医学，2019，25（35）：25-30.
[2]	张新安，连鸿凯，刘云涛，等.单髁膝置换术与全膝关节置换术治疗膝关节内侧间室骨关节炎的近期疗效比较[J].中国临床新医学，2019，12（11）：1213-1217.
[3]	王鑫，段来宝，王艺钧.探讨单髁置换术治疗膝关节内侧间室骨关节炎短期临床疗效[J].世界最新医学信息文摘，2019，19（97）：80-81.
[4]	翟效鹏.膝关节置换术中单髁置换与全膝置换的早期及远期临床疗效分析[J].首都食品与医药，2019，26（23）：39.
[5]	杨林.单髁置换术对老年膝关节骨性关节炎患者康复的影响[J].中国医学创新，2019，16（33）：10-14.
[6]	陈文婷.人工全膝关节置换术术中护理效果及HSS评分、并发症情况的分析[J].国际护理学杂志，2018，37（19）：2596-2601.
[7]	乔艳峰，义勇，王天翀，等.人工全膝表面置换术与内侧单髁关节置换术治疗晚期膝关节病的术后并发症比较[J].双足与保健，2019，28（22）：158-159.
[8]	谭彪，左彪，黄勇.单髁与全膝关节置换治疗膝关节单间室骨关节炎的平衡功能评价[J].中国组织工程研究，2020，24（6）：827-832.
[9]	何云利.膝关节单髁置换术治疗膝关节骨性关节炎的效果[J].中国城乡企业卫生，2019，34（11）：150-151.
[10]	谢国庆，任忠明，金文孝，等.单髁置换术治疗膝内侧间室骨关节炎近中期疗效[J].中国矫形外科杂志，2019，27（21）：1998-2000.
[11]	冷燕奎，林俊宏，曹智强，等.单髁置换术与腓骨上段截骨联合关节镜清理术治疗膝关节内侧间室骨性关节炎的对比研究[J].浙江医学，2019，41（20）：2204-2207.
[12]	张云海，刘伟，黄东辉，等.老年人膝关节单髁置换术中联合关节镜探查的应用体会[J].老年医学与保健，2019，25（5）：575-577.
[13]	关瑞盛，孙开军，董岩，等.单髁置换术治疗老年膝关节骨关节炎的疗效[J].世界最新医学信息文摘，2019，19（81）：88，91.
[14]	朱正元.全膝关节置换术对膝关节骨性关节炎患者功能恢复的影响及疗效分析[J].中国医学创新，2019，16（28）：36-39.
[15]	朱科朝，王俏杰，陈云苏，等.机器人辅助下膝关节单髁置换术短期临床疗效[J].中华关节外科杂志（电子版），2019，13（5）：547-553.
[16]	马利阁，李松生，尹万乐.单髁置换术治疗老年膝骨关节炎的效果及对患者术后恢复情况的影响[J].现代诊断与治疗，2019，30（17）：3043-3045.
[17]	李炼.全膝关节置换术与单髁置换术治疗膝内侧骨关节炎的效果对比[J].当代医药论丛，2019，17（17）：6-8.
[18]	沈志伟，王丹，邵冲.UKA 治疗膝关节内侧间室骨性关节炎的临床疗效研究分析[J].浙江创伤外科，2019，24（4）：784-786.
[19]	胡家铭，陈权，周金依，等.不同血清型腺相关病毒对小鼠膝关节软骨细胞感染效率的比较研究[J].中国骨伤，2019，32（8）：750-755.
[20]	曾智敏，陶崑，凌晶，等.固定平台单髁置换术治疗膝关节内侧骨性关节炎[J].中国骨伤，2019，32（8）：755-758.