A comparative study of proximal femoral fracture fixation with proximal femoral nail and Dynamic hip screw & plating

Journal Title: International Journal of Orthopaedics Sciences - Year 2017, Vol 3, Issue 1

Abstract

Trochanteric fractures are one of the commonest injuries sustained predominantly in patients over sixty years of age. They are three to four times more common in women than in men. These usually occur through bone affected by osteoporosis; trivial fall being the most common mechanism of injury [1]. Discussion: The goal of this study was to compare the functional outcomes of patients with intertrochanteric fractures treated by two different fixation devices, the extramedullary dynamic hip screw and the intramedullary proximal femoral nail. Our study consisted of 30 patients with 30 intertrochanteric fractures out of which 15 were treated with DHS and 15 with PFN. Conclusion: We conclude that in stable intertrochanteric fractures, both the PFN and DHS have similar outcomes. However, in unstable intertrochanteric fractures the PFN has significantly better outcomes in terms of earlier restoration of walking ability as it is an intramedullary implant which can tolerate higher cylindrical loading when compared to DHS type of implants. Bibliography 1. Kaufer H. Mechanics of the Treatment of Hip Injuries. Clin Orthop. 1980; 146:53-61. 2. Kyle RF, Gustilo RB, Premer RF. Analysis of six hundred and twenty-two intertrochanteric hip fractures. A retrospective and prospective study. J Bone Joint Surg. 1979; 61A:216-21. 3. Kaufer H, Mathews LS, Sonstegard D. Stable Fixation of Intertrochanteric Fractures. J Bone Joint Surg. 1974; 56A:899-907. 4. Jewett EL. One-piece angle nail for trochanteric fractures. J Bone Joint Surg. 1941; 23:803-10. Larsson S, Elloy M, Hansson LI. Stability of Osteosynthesis in Trochanteric Fractures. Comparison of three fixation devices in cadavers. Acta Orthop Scand. 1988; 59:386-90.

Authors and Affiliations

Mahesh Kumar NB, Ullas Mahesh, Santosh Kumar G

Keywords

Related Articles

Analysis of outcome of unstable intertrochanteric fractures treated by proximal femoral nail- A prospective and retrospective study

Background: An analytical study was conducted on the outcome of unstable Intertrochanteric fractures treated by conventional proximal femoral nailing in a prospective and retrospective method. Materials and methods: Duri...

A comparison study of preoperative skin preparation using chlorhexidine vs povidone iodine in cases of elective orthopaedic surgery

Preoperative skin preparation is an inalienable part of the patient preparation in any orthopaedic surgery. The obvious goal of this step is to reduce the possibility of a postoperative wound infection. Unfortunately, gu...

Randomized controlled trial comparing open versus closed interlocking nail for closed fracture shaft of femur in Adults

Background: Close reduction and intramedullary fixation of fracture shaft femur proposed by Kuntscher, is the most biological way of treating the fracture shaft femur. But an open version of this procedure, by which the...

Functional outcome of distal third tibial fractures with intramedullary tibial locking nail and poller screws

Back Ground and Objectives: Tibia is the most commonly fractured long bone in the body with an annual incidence of Tibial shaft Fractures is 2 per 1000 individuals. Tibia is a large bone of the body and one of the princi...

A study of patients with middle third clavicle fractures as per treatment given and radiological union

Introduction: The shoulder girdle is connected to the trunk by Clavicle. It ensures mobility and support to the function of upper extremity. Due to its subcutaneous position, clavicular fracture is a common traumatic inj...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP500266
  • DOI 10.22271/ortho.2017.v3.i1h.72
  • Views 106
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Mahesh Kumar NB, Ullas Mahesh, Santosh Kumar G (2017). A comparative study of proximal femoral fracture fixation with proximal femoral nail and Dynamic hip screw & plating. International Journal of Orthopaedics Sciences, 3(1), 499-505. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-500266