Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of PFNA- Ⅱ and INTERTAN in the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fractures.Methods From May 2012 to December 2015,112cases of unstable intertrochanteric fractures were treated with intramedullary nail,including 68 cases in PFNA- Ⅱ group and 44 cases in INTERTAN group.According to AO typing:A2.220 cases,A2.334 cases,A3.124 cases,A3.218 cases,A3.316 cases. Results The operation time and blood loss were less than that in PFNA-Ⅱ group,the distance of fracture after operation was less than that in INTERTAN group(P<0.05).Patients were followed up for 6~12 months (average 8.2 months).There was no significant difference in the healing time andthe function of hip joint at the last follow-up between the two groups(P>0.05). Conclusions Two kinds of intramedullary fixation are effective methods forthe treatment of unstable femoral intertrochanteric fracture,PFNA- Ⅱ and INTERTAN have their own characteristics. The operation of PFNA- Ⅱ is simple and can be quickly completed. INTERTAN's anti rotation and compression effect are better and more firmly fixed in theory.%目的 比较PFNA-Ⅱ和INTERTAN治疗不稳定型股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效.方法 自2012年5月至2015年12月采用髓内钉治疗112例不稳定型股骨粗隆间骨折患者,PFNA-Ⅱ内固定组68例,INTERTAN内固定组44例.按AO分型:A2.220例,A2.334例,A3.124例,A3.218例,A3.316例.结果 PFNA-Ⅱ组手术时间短,术中出血少,INTERTAN组术后骨折端距离小(P<0.05).患者获随访6~12个月(平均8.2个月),两组骨折愈合时间、末次随访髋关节功能差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 两种髓内固定材料都是治疗不稳定型股骨粗隆间骨折的有效方法,各具特点.PFNA-Ⅱ操作简单,可迅速完成手术.INTERTAN防旋和加压效果更好,理论上固定更坚强.
展开▼
