Title
Komparativna analiza rezultata operativnog lečenja preloma dijafize butne kosti metodom zaključavajućeg intramedularnog klina i samodinamizirajućeg unutrašnjeg fiksatora po Mitkoviću
Creator
Bulatović, Nikola
Copyright date
2018
Object Links
Select license
Autorstvo-Nekomercijalno-Bez prerade 3.0 Srbija (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)
License description
Dozvoljavate samo preuzimanje i distribuciju dela, ako/dok se pravilno naznačava ime autora, bez ikakvih promena dela i bez prava komercijalnog korišćenja dela. Ova licenca je najstroža CC licenca. Osnovni opis Licence: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/rs/deed.sr_LATN. Sadržaj ugovora u celini: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/rs/legalcode.sr-Latn
Language
Serbian
Cobiss-ID
Theses Type
Doktorska disertacija
description
Datum odbrane: 24.08.2018.
Other responsibilities
mentor
Mitković, Milorad
predsednik komisije
Lešić, Aleksandar
član komisije
Milenković, Saša
Academic Expertise
Medicinske nauke
University
Univerzitet u Nišu
Faculty
Medicinski fakultet
Group
Katedra za hirurgiju
Alternative title
Comparative analysis of surgical treatment femoral shaft fractures by method interlocking nails and selfdynamizable internal fixator Mitkovic
Publisher
[N. Bulatović]
Format
117 listova
description
Beleška o autoru: listovi 112-114;
Bibliografija: listovi 100-105.
description
Medicin-orthopeadic
Abstract (en)
Introduction: The incidence of fracture of the femur bone ranges from 1.5 to 9.9: 100 000 persons during the year, and most commonly isolated injuries.
Material and methods: The study was conducted on a sample of 100 subjects with 104 fractures, divided into two groups based on the treatment method. The average monitoring time is 12-23 months. In the first group, with selfdynamizable internal fixator (SIF) was used in 55 patients with 57 fractures. In the second group, in 45 subjects with 47 fractures treated with interlocking femoral nails. Both surgical methods are based on the concept of relative stability. For AO / ASIF classification (type A 39, tips B 51, type C 14), Winquist Hansen (type I 28, type II 39, type III 23, type IV 14) and Gustillo Anderson classification (Type I 7 and Type II 2). The analized complications are: infection, nonunion, deformity of the extremities (malposition of the axis, rotation and length), malunion et break and displacement of osteosynthetic material, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, neurovascular injury, compartment syndrome, and amputation.
Objective: Comparative analysis of the process of scaling, functional recovery and complications between these two methods of treatment of femoral shaft fracture.
Discussion: Protocols and trauma scores provide guidelines for a diagnostic pathway for adequate orthopedic care, contributing to reducing morbidity, mortality and more successful treatment. In politraumatized special effects in improving treatment, it has been shown through guidelines based on two principles: early total care ETC and damage control orthopaedic DCO.
Conclusion: Both methods equally enable the achievement of good results of treatment, which is displayed through the values of the analyzed parameters.
Authors Key words
Prelom butne kosti, intramedularni klin, unutrašnji fiksator
Authors Key words
femoral shaft fracture , selfdynamizable internal fixator, interlocking nails
Classification
616.718.4-001.5-089(043.3)
Subject
B 007
Type
Tekst
Abstract (en)
Introduction: The incidence of fracture of the femur bone ranges from 1.5 to 9.9: 100 000 persons during the year, and most commonly isolated injuries.
Material and methods: The study was conducted on a sample of 100 subjects with 104 fractures, divided into two groups based on the treatment method. The average monitoring time is 12-23 months. In the first group, with selfdynamizable internal fixator (SIF) was used in 55 patients with 57 fractures. In the second group, in 45 subjects with 47 fractures treated with interlocking femoral nails. Both surgical methods are based on the concept of relative stability. For AO / ASIF classification (type A 39, tips B 51, type C 14), Winquist Hansen (type I 28, type II 39, type III 23, type IV 14) and Gustillo Anderson classification (Type I 7 and Type II 2). The analized complications are: infection, nonunion, deformity of the extremities (malposition of the axis, rotation and length), malunion et break and displacement of osteosynthetic material, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, neurovascular injury, compartment syndrome, and amputation.
Objective: Comparative analysis of the process of scaling, functional recovery and complications between these two methods of treatment of femoral shaft fracture.
Discussion: Protocols and trauma scores provide guidelines for a diagnostic pathway for adequate orthopedic care, contributing to reducing morbidity, mortality and more successful treatment. In politraumatized special effects in improving treatment, it has been shown through guidelines based on two principles: early total care ETC and damage control orthopaedic DCO.
Conclusion: Both methods equally enable the achievement of good results of treatment, which is displayed through the values of the analyzed parameters.
“Data exchange” service offers individual users metadata transfer in several different formats. Citation formats are offered for transfers in texts as for the transfer into internet pages. Citation formats include permanent links that guarantee access to cited sources. For use are commonly structured metadata schemes : Dublin Core xml and ETUB-MS xml, local adaptation of international ETD-MS scheme intended for use in academic documents.