Objective To contrast observation of patel a and tension with the clinical ef icacy of treatment of patel ar fracture patients. Methods Selecting a hospital orthopaedics in July 2012 to July 2014,70 cases of patel ar fracture patients as the research object,in accordance with the time were divided into control group and research group,35 cases in the control group treated with patel a device;and Team with tension band for treatment,col ection of two groups of patients with clinical observation index (fracture healing time,the knee joint function assessment) and compare analysis. Results The control group were treated by tension band for treatment of patel a fracture,fracture healing time (13.7±1.3)d,good function of knee joint mobility 33 cases index (94.2%) and control group (14.0 ±1.5)d,32 cases (91.4%) after statistics processing has no statistical significance ( > 0.05),postoperative review found no such as deep infection,breakage of internal fixation loosening and surgical complications,two groups of patients were achieved ideal clinical therapeutic ef ect. Conclusion Two methods of treatment in patients with patel ar fracture in clinical treatment can achieve good clinical ef icacy. Patel a with minimal y invasive,simple operation,good biocompatibility,especial y used in clinical treatment of patients with comminuted patel a fracture.%目的：对比观察聚髌器与张力带治疗髌骨骨折患者的临床疗效。方法选取某院骨科2012年7月~2014年7月收治的70例髌骨骨折患者为研究对象，按照收治时间分为对照组与研究组各35例，对照组采用聚髌器进行治疗；研究组采用张力带进行治疗，收集两组患者临床观察指标(骨折愈合时间、膝关节功能评价)并进行比对分析工作。结果对照组患者采用张力带进行髌骨骨折治疗，骨折愈合时间(13.7±1.3)d、膝关节功能活动度优良33例(94.2%)与对照组指标(14.0±1.5)d、32例(91.4%)经统计学处理无统计学意义(P>0.05)，术后回访并未发现深部感染、内固定松动及断裂等手术并发症发生，两组患者均取得了比较理想的临床治疗效果。结论两种治疗方法在髌骨骨折患者临床治疗中均能取得良好的临床疗效。聚髌器由于具有微创、操作简便、生物相容性好等特点，尤为适用在粉碎性髌骨骨折患者临床治疗中。
展开▼
