Nailing the Outcome: A Comparative Study of Proximal Femoral Nail Anti-Rotation-II and Trochanteric Fixation Nail in Unstable Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures
- PMID: 40786811
- PMCID: PMC12328931
- DOI: 10.13107/jocr.2025.v15.i08.5980
Nailing the Outcome: A Comparative Study of Proximal Femoral Nail Anti-Rotation-II and Trochanteric Fixation Nail in Unstable Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures
Abstract
Introduction: Intertrochanteric femur fractures are among the most common injuries in the elderly population and represent a major public health issue. Treatment aims to achieve stable fixation that allows early mobilization and minimizes complications. The choice of implant plays a critical role in clinical outcomes, particularly in unstable fracture patterns.
Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the intraoperative parameters, functional outcomes, union times, and complications between proximal femoral nail anti-rotation-II (PFNA-II) and trochanteric femur nail (TFN) in patients with unstable intertrochanteric femur fractures.
Materials and methods: A prospective, randomized, and comparative study was conducted in a tertiary care center over a period of 18 months. One hundred patients aged 50-85 years with Boyd and Griffin type III fractures were divided into two groups. Group A (n = 50) was treated using TFN, while Group B (n = 50) received PFNA-II. Surgical techniques, post-operative care, and rehabilitation protocols were standardized. Data on operative time, intraoperative blood loss, union duration, Harris Hip scores (HHS), and complications were collected and statistically analyzed.
Results: The PFNA-II group had shorter operative times (Mean 65.5 min. vs. 71.5 min) and less blood loss (253 ± 36.4 mL vs. 275 ± 35.1 mL) than the TFN group. Average union time was similar between groups. Mean HHS at 6 months was higher in the PFNA-II group (67.83 ± 8.05) than the TFN group (71.72 ± 7.45), though the difference was not statistically significant. PFNA-II also showed a lower incidence of implant-related complications.
Conclusion: PFNA-II offers certain intraoperative advantages and trends toward better functional outcomes and fewer complications, but the differences with TFN were not statistically significant. Both implants are viable for the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fractures.
Keywords: Intertrochanteric fracture; functional outcome; intramedullary fixation; proximal femoral nail anti-rotation-II; trochanteric femur nail.
Copyright: © Indian Orthopaedic Research Group.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of Interest: Nil
Figures
Similar articles
-
Comparison of Post-operative Functional Outcomes of Intertrochanteric Fractures Treated With Trochanteric Fixation Nail Versus Proximal Femoral Nail.Cureus. 2025 Jun 28;17(6):e86942. doi: 10.7759/cureus.86942. eCollection 2025 Jun. Cureus. 2025. PMID: 40734886 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of proximal femoral universal nail and proximal femoral nail anti-rotation internal fixation for older patients with intertrochanteric femoral fracture: a retrospective cohort study.Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Aug 11;12:1642909. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1642909. eCollection 2025. Front Med (Lausanne). 2025. PMID: 40861220 Free PMC article.
-
Intramedullary Nailing of Intertrochanteric Femoral Fractures in a Level I Trauma Center in Finland: What Complications Can be Expected?Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2024 Feb 1;482(2):278-288. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002792. Epub 2023 Aug 15. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2024. PMID: 37582281 Free PMC article. Review.
-
[Effectiveness of anatomical major nail implant guide in the treatment of senile intertrochanteric fracture with proximal femoral nail antirotation].Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2025 Jul 25;38(7):668-75. doi: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20250429. Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2025. PMID: 40759540 Chinese.
-
Intramedullary nails for extracapsular hip fractures in adults.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Sep 12;2014(9):CD004961. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004961.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014. PMID: 25212485 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Johnell O, Kanis JA. An estimate of the worldwide prevalence and disability associated with osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int. 2006;17:1726–33. - PubMed
-
- Boyd HB, Griffin LL. Classification and treatment of trochanteric fractures. Arch Surg (1920) 1949;58:853–66. - PubMed
-
- Marsh JL, Slongo TF, Agel J, Broderick JS, Creevey W, DeCoster TA, et al. Fracture and dislocation classification compendium-2007:Orthopaedic trauma association classification, database and outcomes committee. J Orthop Trauma. 2007;21:S1–133. - PubMed
-
- Haidukewych GJ. Intertrochanteric fractures:Ten tips to improve results. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:712–9. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources