动物造模,胫骨大段骨缺损模型 z-bio 2021-01-14 506

　　Objective: By comparing the internal fixation plate, intramedullary nail and external fixation methods based on mask-induced membrane technology, establish and establish a model of segmental tibial bone defect in rats and a better model of induced membrane formation characteristics.

　　 Method: 60 10-week-old SPF male SD rats were randomly divided into 3 groups: internal fixation plate group (IFP), intramedullary needle group (IMP) and external fixation group (CEF)? A 4mm bone defect model was established in the center of the right tibia, using a self-made 6-hole stainless steel plate, a Kirschner wire with a diameter of 1 mm and a self-made round external fixation device to fix the model. The modeling time and blood loss were recorded for the duration of swelling of the limbs. And perform X-ray examination to observe the bones. cement? The stability of the fixation device; HE induction membrane staining to observe tissue morphology and structural characteristics?

　　Result: IMP and CEF groups are significantly better than IFP group in terms of modeling time, blood loss and model success rate (P0.05))? (3) In the IFP group, there was 1 case of screw loosening, 3 cases of bone cement loosening, and 1 case of bone cement loosening in the CEF group. Is the IMP group fixed well? Regarding infection, there were 3 cases of plate exposure in the IFP group and 2 cases of pus in the IMP group. Has an infection occurred in the CEF group? (5) The thickness of the induced membrane tissue is 460 to 520μm, there is no statistically significant difference between the three groups (P\→0.05)?

　　 Conclusion: There are three ways to build a MTBD model, but for a comprehensive review, is CEF a better way to build a rat MTBD model by simulating the Masquelet technology?