Screw versus helical proximal femoral nail in the treatment of unstable trochanteric fractures in the elderly
- PMID: 31316254
- PMCID: PMC6611961
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jcot.2018.07.012
Screw versus helical proximal femoral nail in the treatment of unstable trochanteric fractures in the elderly
Abstract
Purpose: Comparison of clinical, radiological and functional outcomes of screw proximal femoral nail (PFN) and helical PFN in management of unstable trochanteric fractures.
Methods: This prospective randomised comparative study included 60 patients with closed unstable intertrochanteric fractures (AO classification-A2.2-A2.3 & A3.1-A3.3). Patients were randomised to 2 treatment groups using simple random sampling method utilizing computer based randomisation. Screw PFN and helical PFN were used for internal fixation with 30 patients in each group.
Results: Both groups were similar in respect of age, gender, fracture classification, quality of fracture reduction, duration of hospitalization, post-operative complications, residual/late deformity as well as functional assessment. However, mean duration of surgery was significantly lower (23.1%) in helical PFN group as compared to screw PFN group (43.32 ± 8.20 min vs. 35.20 ± 6.03 min, p < 0.001). Furthermore, mean blood loss was not significant in either of the study groups but it was significantly lesser (30.1%) in helical PFN group as compared to screw PFN group (77.80 ± 17.39 ml vs. 59.80 ± 14.96 ml, p < 0.001). Also, mean number of images taken was significantly lower (58.7%) in helical PFN group as compared to screw PFN group (29.52 ± 4.85 no vs. 18.60 ± 3.12 no, t = 9.47; p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Both screw PFN and helical PFN are equally effective implants in internal fixation of unstable trochanteric fractures with no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) in any of the outcome measures. However, helical PFN group fared marginally better in terms of operative time, blood loss and imaging required.
Figures
References
-
- Gullberg B., Johnell O., Kanis J.A. World-wide projections for hip fracture. Osteoporos Int. 1997;7(5):407–413. A journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA. - PubMed
-
- Kanis J.A., Johnell O., De Laet C., Jonsson B., Oden A., Ogelsby A.K. International variations in hip fracture probabilities: implications for risk assessment. J Bone Miner Res. 2002;17(7):1237–1244. The official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. - PubMed
-
- Smektala R., Ohmann C., Paech S. On the prognosis of hip fractures. Assessment of mortality after hip fractures by analyzing overlapping segments of longitudinal data. Unfallchirurg. 2005;108(11):927–928. 30-37. - PubMed
-
- Johnell O., Kanis J.A. An estimate of the worldwide prevalence, mortality and disability associated with hip fracture. Osteoporos Int. 2004;15(11):897–902. A journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA. - PubMed
-
- Willoughby R. Dynamic hip screw in the management of reverse obliquity intertrochanteric neck of femur fractures. Injury. 2005;36(1):105–109. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources