[Comparison of internal fixation treatment of tibia intercondylar eminence fracture between absorbable screw and metallic screw].
OBJECTIVE
To compare advantage and disadvantage of internal fixation method for tibia intercondylar eminence fracture between absorbable screw and metallic screw.


METHODS
From 1996 to 2002, 200 patients with fracture of tibia intercondylar eminence were divided into group A (with absorbable screw, n = 120) and group B (with metallic screw, n = 80). And the biological compatibility, biomechanics, bone union and complications were compared between two groups.


RESULTS
There were no obvious differences in operating time and circumstance of recovery position between two groups. Group A was obviously better than group B in biological compatibility, biomechanics, bone union, joint function recovery. The average healing time of group A was three months, that of group B was three and half months. The good rates of joint function in two groups were 98.0% and 95.0% respectively. The occurrence rates of wound arthritis were 1.7% and 3.7%. There was significant difference between them (P < 0.01).


CONCLUSIONS
Absorbable screw is a more ideal material of internal fixation to treat tibia intercondylar eminence fracture.
Zhang
Zhankui
Z
Department of Orthopedics, Longgang Center Hospital of Shenzhen, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518116, P. R. China.
Ye
Junqiang
J
Chen
Weiquan
W
D020341:Absorbable Implants; D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D001182:Arthroscopy; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D001863:Bone Screws; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D005593:Fracture Fixation, Internal / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods; D006801:Humans; D007718:Knee Injuries / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery; D008297:Male; D008670:Metals; D008875:Middle Aged; D011859:Radiography; D013718:Tensile Strength; D013978:Tibial Fractures / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D016896:Treatment Outcome
D008670:Metals