Internal Fixation And External Fixation Of Distal Tibial Fractures Clinical Efficacy

Objective:Through the distal tibial fracture patients were treated with open reduction and internal fixation or external fixation surgery patients, comparing two surgical indications and efficacy in clinical.Methods:A retrospective analysis from January 2012 to March 2014 by the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University orthopedic surgery system through the distal tibial fractures were 176 cases, there are 53 cases of complete regular follow-up record, age greater than equal to 50. Divided respectively into open reduction and internal fixation group and external fixator group, open reduction and internal fixation group of 31 cases:17 cases of male, female 14 cases;.External fixator group of 22 cases:14 cases of male, female 8 cases;. Comparison of two groups of operation time, fracture healing time, ankle joint function recovery time, postoperative infection complications occurred. Referring AOFAS (American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society) scoring criteria to evaluate ankle function and excellent rate of postoperative evaluation.Results:Statistical analysis using spss17.0 regular follow-up treatment after the conditions are met the inclusion criteria of 53 cases of medical records;(1) Internal fixation group in operation time compared with external fixation group, the two sets of data by t test, t=11.282, P=0.0001, the difference was statistically significant; Restoration work (weeks) two sets of data by t test, t=3.756, P value=0.0001, the difference was statistically significant. External fixation group than internal fixation group less operation time, fracture healing time is shorter; Internal fixation group faster than external fixator group to return to work.Two groups in postoperative infection complications after continuity correction, the correction of the χ2=0.785, P= 0.376, there is no significant statistical differences in the two groups of data.(2)Two groups of data on postoperative AOFAS score by t test, t= 1.136,P=0.261, there is no significant statistical differences in the two groups of data. And compared the two groups of patients in the postoperative excellent rate, the data by x test,χ2<0.0001, P=1.000, the excellent rate was no significant difference between the two groups of patients;Conclusions:Clinical retrospective analysis, In respect to the extent of the treatment of distal tibial fractures in patients with more severe and involve the ankle for metaphyseal surface as external fixator can be more safe and effective, but the treatment of low-energy fractures open reduction and internal trauma as a result of the treatment plan.