[Comparison of different diameter hollow screw for the treatment of XXXX ].

@entity1 @entity2249 @entity174 @entity3354 @entity260
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the outcome of two kinds of diameter hollow screws for the treatment of @entity2249 . METHODS: From June 2008 to June 2013, 117 @entity1 with @entity2249 were treated by closed reduction and hollow screws fixation. Among them,48 @entity1 were fixed by 6.5 mm screw including 30 males and 18 females with an average age of (45.61    11.99) years old ranging from 19 to 60 years old, involving 17 cases in Garden I/II and 31 cases in @entity3354 ; 69 @entity1 were fixed by 8.0 mm screw including 40 males and 29 females with an average age of (45.17    9.95) years old ranging from 18 to 60 years old, involving 31 cases in Garden I/II and 38 cases in @entity3354 . The general information, operative time, hospital stay time, reduction quality, diameter of femoral head and neck, @entity174 healing time, the rate of @entity174 healing, @entity260 were recorded and evaluated. Harris scoring was used to evaluate the hip joint function. RESULTS: All @entity1 were followed up for 19.6 months (18 to 24 months). The difference of operative time, duration of hospitalization, quality of reduction were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). There was no difference between two groups about the average diameter of the femoral head and neck, the @entity174 healing time, the rate of @entity260 (P > 0.05). There were no difference between two groups about Harris scale. There were significant difference between @entity3354 and I /II (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Closed reduction and internal fixation with hollow screw in treating the young adult @entity1 with @entity2249 is the first choice, both different diameters hollow screws could meet the requirements of fixation of @entity2249 , and not affect on @entity174 healing @entity260 .
