medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2013, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2013; 27 (4)

Proximal femoral intramedullary nail versus DHS plate for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. A prospective analysis

Calderón A, Ramos T, Vilchez F, Mendoza-Lemus O, Peña V, Cárdenas-Estrada E, Acosta-Olivo C

Language: Spanish
References: 22
Page: 236-239
PDF size: 151.11 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To show that patients with intertrochanteric fractures treated with a proximal femoral nail have a better postoperative course than those treated with a DHS plate (dynamic hip screw). Methods: Patients with a Boyd & Griffin type II intertrochanteric fracture were randomly divided into two groups: a group of patients treated with a PFN and another one treated with a DHS plate. All patients were assessed at 2, 4, 8 and 16 weeks using the Harris scale and the visual analog scale pre- and postoperatively, as well as the operative time, incision size, intraoperative bleeding, onset of partial and/or total weight bearing, healing time, time to attain prior physical activity level, and radiographic result. Results: 32 patients met our criteria. The variables that had a significant reduction were: incision, operative time, postoperative pain according to the visual analog scale, onset of mobility, partial weight bearing and pain at 2 weeks. Conclusions: The proximal femoral nail has better short-term outcomes than the DHS plate; however, in the medium term both implants have the same outcomes.


REFERENCES

  1. Lieberman JR, Romano PS, Mahendra G, Keyzer J, Chilcott M: The treatment of hip fractures: variations in care. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006; 442: 239-244.

  2. Lorich DG, Geller DS, Nielson JH: Osteoporotic pertrocantheric hip fractures: management and current controversies. Instr Course Lect. 2004; 53: 441-54.

  3. Canale T: Campbell’s Operative Orthopaedics. St. Louis, MO. Elsevier. 10th ed. 2003.

  4. Kaplan K, Miyamoto R, Levine BR, Egol KA, Zuckerman JD: Surgical management of hip fractures: an evidence-based review of the literature. II: intertrochanteric fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008; 16(11): 665-673.

  5. Boyd HB, Griffin LL: Classification and treatment of trochanteric fractures. Arch Surg. 1949; 58(6): 853-66.

  6. World Medical Organization: Declaration of Helsinki. British Medical Journal 1996; 313(7070): 1448-1449.

  7. Harris WH: Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty: an end-results study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969; 51: 737-55.

  8. Pajarinen J, Lindahl J, Michelsson O, Savolainen V, Hirvensalo E: Pertrochanteric femoral fractures treated with a dynamic hip screw or a proximal femoral nail. A randomized study comparing post-operative rehabilitation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005; 87(1): 76-81.

  9. Ge X, Zhang JM, Lu WC, Qiu SQ: Selection of the internal fixation for various types of intertrochanteric fracture in aged patients and prevention for complication. Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2009; 22(5): 385-6.

  10. O’Brien PJ: The sliding hip screw is better than short femoral nails for extracapsular femoral fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004; 86: 1836.

  11. Zhao C, Liu DY, Guo JJ, Li LP, Zheng YF, Yang HB, Sun JH: Comparison of proximal femoral nail and dynamic hip screw for treating intertrochanteric fractures. Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2009; 22(7): 535-7.

  12. Käfer M, Palm M, Zwank L, Cakir B, Puhl W, Käfer W: What influence does the implant have on the perioperative morbidity following internal fixation of proximal femur fracture? Analysis of dynamic hip screw and proximal femoral nailing. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2005; 143(1): 64-71.

  13. Jin YM, Chen JP, Li XL, Huand YZ, Yang D: Retrospective study of comparing the different internal fixation methods in treating intertrochanteric fracture of femur. Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2008; 21(5): 329-32.

  14. Klinger HM, Baums MH, Eckert M, Neugebauer R: A comparative study of unstable per and intertrochanteric femoral fractures treated with dynamic hip screw (DHS) and trochanteric butt-press plate vs. proximal femoral nail (PFN). Zentralbl Chir. 2005; 130(4): 301-6.

  15. Nuber S, Schönweiss T, Rüter A: Stabilisation of unstable trochanteric femoral fractures. Dynamic hip screw (DHS) with trochanteric stabilisation plate versus proximal femur nail (PFN). Unfallchirurg. 2003; 106(1): 39-47.

  16. Boldin C, Seibert FJ, Fankhauser F, Peicha G, Grechenig W, Szyszkowitz R: The proximal femoral nail (PFN)― a minimal invasive treatment of unstable proximal femoral fractures: a prospective study of 55 patients with a follow-up of 15 months. Acta Orthop Scand. 2003; 74(1): 53-8.

  17. Knobe M, Münker R, Sellei RM, Schmidt-Rohlfing B, Erli HJ, Strobl CS, Niethard FU: Unstable pertrochanteric femur fractures. Failure rate, lag screw sliding and outcome with extra- and intramedullary devices (PCCP, DHS and PFN). Z Orthop Unfall. 2009; 147(3): 306-13.

  18. Pavelka T, Matejka J, Cervenková H: Complications of internal fixation by a short proximal femoral nail. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2005; 72(6): 344-54.

  19. Gorodnichenko AI, Uskov ON, Gorbatov BI, Minaev AN: Use of modern fixators in trochanteric fractures treatment. Khirurgiia (Mosk). 2008; (6): 67-72.

  20. Lindskog D, Baumgaertner MR: Unstable intertrochanteric hip fractures in the elderly. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2004; 12(3): 179-190.

  21. Sadowski C, Lübbeke A, Saudan M, Riand N, Stern R, Hoffmeyer P: Treatment of reverse oblique and transverse intertrochanteric fractures with use of an intramedullary nail or a 95 degrees screw-plate: a prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002; 84-A(3): 372-381.

  22. Banan H, Al-Sabti A, Jimulia T, Hart AJ: The treatment of unstable, extracapsular hip fractures with the AO/ASIF proximal femoral nail (PFN)― our first 60 cases. Injury. 2002; 33(5): 401-5.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com