目的:比较3D打印导板辅助置入载距突螺钉与常规手术治疗跟骨关节内骨折的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析2016年1月至2018年4月治疗38例跟骨关节内骨折患者资料。依据术中是否采用3D打印导板定位分成3D打印组和常规手术组。3D打印组17例，男16例，女1例；年龄（45.58±9.96）岁（范围29~59岁）；SandersⅡ型5例，Ⅲ型11例，Ⅳ型1例；闭合性骨折15例，Tscherne软组织损伤分级：1级8例，2级5例，3级2例；开放性骨折2例，Gustilo-AndersonⅡ型1例，Ⅲ C型1例。常规手术组21例，男20例，女1例；年龄（46.38±9.05）（范围29~66岁）；SandersⅡ型10例，Ⅲ型7例，Ⅳ型4例；闭合性骨折20例，Tscherne软组织损伤分级：1级13例，2级4例，3级3例；开放性骨折1例，为Gustilo-AndersonⅡ型。比较两组患者的手术时间、载距突螺钉置入率、B?hler角、Gissane角、跟骨高度、长度、宽度、术后并发症、末次随访时美国足踝外科协会（American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society，AOFAS）踝-后足评分。结果:3D打印组和常规手术组分别获得平均10.4和11.6个月的随访。3D打印组手术时间（93.82±15.96）min，优于常规手术组的（109.52±25.73）min，两组比较差异有统计学意义（n t=1.920，n P0.05）；两组患者均未发生深部感染、皮瓣坏死、骨髓炎等严重并发症。术后3D打印组1例发生切口积血，常规手术组1例发生切口延迟愈合。3D打印组术后2年时AOFAS评分为（87.82±5.11）分，常规手术组为（81.19±12.46）分，两组比较差异有统计学意义（n t=2.056，n P< 0.05）。n 结论:跟骨关节内骨折采用3D打印导板定位可精准置入载距突螺钉，减少手术时间，术后疗效满意。“,”Objective:To compare the clinical effect of 3D-printed plate guiding sustentaculum tail screw with conventional operation for intra-articular calcaneal fracture.Methods:Data of 38 patients with intra-articular calcaneal fracture treated from January 2016 to April 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into 3D-printed group and conventional surgery group according to whether 3D-printed guide plate was used or not. The 3D-printed group consisted of 17 patients, including 16 males and 1 female, aging from 29 to 59 years old. There were 5 of Sanders type II fractures, 11 of type III and 1 of type IV. There were 15 closed fracture, including 8 cases of grade 1, 5 of grade 2 and 2 of grade 3 according to Tscherne soft tissue classification. There were 2 cases of open fracture, including 1 type II and 1 type III according to Gustilo-Anderson classification. The conventional surgery group consisted of 21 patients, including 20 males and 1 female, aging from 29 to 66 years old. There were 10 cases of Sanders type II fractures, 7 of type III and 4 of type IV. There were 20 cases of closed fracture, including 13 cases of grade 1, 4 of grade 2 and 3 of grade 3 according to Tscherne soft tissue classification. There was one case of open fracture which was Gustilo-Anderson type II. The differences were investigated between the two groups in their operation time, placement rating of sustentaculum tail screw, B?hler angle, Gissane angle, calcaneal height, length and width, postoperative complications and the last follow-up scores according to the ankle and hindfoot score system of American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS).Results:The 3D-printed group and the conventional surgery group received an average of 10.4 and 11.6 months follow-up respectively. The average operation time of the 3D-printed group was 93.82±15.96 mins, which was shorter than that of the conventional surgery group 109.52±25.73 min, and there was significant difference between the two groups (n t=1.920, n P0.05). No serious complications such as deep infection, flap necrosis and osteomyelitis were found in the two groups, only one case of incision hemorrhage occurred in 3D-printed group and one delayed wound healing case occurred in the conventional surgery group. The mean AOFAS score of the 3D-printed group was 87.82±5.11, which was higher than that of the conventional surgery group 81.19±12.46, and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (n t=2.056, n P< 0.05).n Conclusion:Applying 3D-printed plate guiding the sustentaculum tail can reduce the operative time of calcaneal fracture and accurately locate the sustentaculum tail screw, which led to a better clinical outcome, and this is a feasible adjuvant therapy.