Functional Outcome After Antegrade Femoral Nailing: A Comparison of Trochanteric Fossa Versus Tip of Greater Trochanter Entry Point

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 75-78
Author(s):  
M.F. Swiontkowski
2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 196-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chloe Ansari Moein ◽  
Henk-Jan ten Duis ◽  
Liam Oey ◽  
Gerard de Kort ◽  
Wout van der Meulen ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Kanta Prasad Meena ◽  
Mahendra Kumar Yadav ◽  
Deepak Devatheya

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> In case of close nailing for femoral shaft fractures, the nail is inserted into the medullary cavity through the proximal femur without disturbing the periosteal blood supply of at the fracture site. The piriformis fossa and greater trochanter has been commonly described as starting points for antegrade femoral nailing. The purpose of this study was to compare results of two entry ports being used for intramedullary nailing for femoral shaft fractures.</p><p class="abstract"><strong><span lang="EN-US">Methods:</span></strong><span lang="EN-US"> This study was conducted during a period of one year. The patients admitted with femoral diaphyseal fractures for antegrade nailing were divided in two groups alternatively for piriformis fossa entry point and greater trochanter entry point. Total number of patient in each group was 25 (n = 25). Functional outcome were analyzed at final follow up using Hari’s hip score.</span></p><p class="abstract"><strong><span lang="EN-US">Results:</span></strong><span lang="EN-US"> There was no significant difference clinical and functional output in both group but intraoperative time and fluoroscopic time was significant (P &lt;0.001).</span></p><p class="abstract"><strong><span lang="EN-US">Conclusions:</span></strong><span lang="EN-US"> Femoral nailing through the greater trochanter entry portal with specifically designed nails should be considered a rational alternative to femoral nailing compared to Piriformis fossa entry portal with the benefit of reduced requirement for fluoroscopy and decreased operative time in obese patients. Statistically no significant difference (&gt;0.005) in clinical and Functional outcome based on Hari’s hip score.</span></p>


Injury ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 36 (11) ◽  
pp. 1337-1342 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.M. Ansari Moein ◽  
M.H.J. Verhofstad ◽  
R.L.A.W. Bleys ◽  
Chr. van der Werken

Injury ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 40 (8) ◽  
pp. 791-794 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ioannis Charopoulos ◽  
Peter V. Giannoudis
Keyword(s):  

2001 ◽  
Vol 15 (7) ◽  
pp. 488-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Dora ◽  
M. Leunig ◽  
M. Beck ◽  
D. Rothenfluh ◽  
R. Ganz

2014 ◽  
Vol 96-B (9) ◽  
pp. 1274-1281 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Farhang ◽  
R. Desai ◽  
J. H. Wilber ◽  
D. R. Cooperman ◽  
R. W. Liu

Author(s):  
Gineshmon Chandy ◽  
Saju S.

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Intertrochanteric fractures are one of the commonly occurring injuries in elderly patients and are high among females and those with osteoporosis. They were treated with either dynamic hip screw (DHS) fixation or proximal femoral nailing (PFNA2) here at our institution. The study was conducted in order to find which method of surgical fixation has better functional outcome.  </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> Total 96 patients of intertrochanteric fractures admitted during the study period of November 2017 to April 2019 were included for the study. These patients were randomly divided into two groups; DHS was used as implant in group1 and PFNA2 in group 2. Postoperatively patients were followed up after 1 month, 3months and 6 months of the surgery and were assessed using Harris hip score.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Harris hip score was higher with PFNA2 group compared to DHS group in all follow-ups. In unstable fractures DHS group had poor outcome compared to PFNA2. Radiological union occurred in 27.1 % cases by 3 months and 72.9% cases by 6 months with DHS whereas 70.8% and 97.9% respectively with PFNA2.  </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> PFNA2 gives a better functional outcome when compared to DHS. Even though DHS gives good functional outcome in stable fractures it is not so in the case of unstable fractures. The radiological union also is faster with proximal femoral nailing. Hence in our opinion PFNA2 can be the better fixation device compared to DHS especially in unstable fractures.  </p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document