The Gotfried percutaneous compression plate compared with the conventional classic hip screw for the fixation of intertrochanteric fractures of the hip

2003 ◽  
Vol 85-B (1) ◽  
pp. 148-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. GOTFRIED
Keyword(s):  
Intertrochanteric Fractures ◽  
Compression Plate ◽  
Hip Screw ◽  
Percutaneous Compression Plate

scholarly journals A comparative study between proximal femur locking compression plate and dynamic hip screw fixation in management of intertrochantric femur fractures

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 327
Author(s):  
Mithlesh Kumar Meena ◽  
Vinay Joshi
Keyword(s):  
Locking Plate ◽  
Locking Compression Plate ◽  
Dynamic Hip Screw ◽  
Intertrochanteric Fractures ◽  
Trochanteric Fractures ◽  
Superficial Infection ◽  
Femur Fractures ◽  
Compression Plate ◽  
Hip Screw ◽  
The Mean

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Proximal femur fractures are one of the commonest fracture encountered in orthopaedic trauma practice. Dynamic hip screw (DHS) is the gold standard procedure for treatment for stable intertrochanteric  fractures, however problem arises with unstable fractures in maintenance of neck shaft angle and proper reduction. Here we are giving results of trochanteric fractures treated with proximal femoral locking compression plate (PFLCP) as compared with dynamic hip screw (DHS).</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> This study was a prospective study. Two groups of trochanteric fractures of 25 patients operated with DHS and LCP were taken. Each patient was followed-up from July 2011 to October 2012 for minimum of 12 month or till the bony union.<strong> </strong>Every fracture was classified according to AO classification. Functional results will be assessed as per modified Harris hip evaluation score.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Among 25 patient treated with PFLCP, length discrepancy was .857 cm while that for DHS was 1.2 cm. The mean time of unaided walking with LCP Was 14.20 weeks while for DHS it was 16.20 weeks. The mean varus angulation for LCP 8 degree while for DHS 10.2 degree. In LCP in 1 case screw cut out from head and neck of femur while in DHS, same is seen in 2 cases and in addition loss of position of lag screw seen in 5 cases.one case was found with superficial infection in LCP while in case of DHS 3 cases with deep infection for that implant was removed and 6 cases were found with superficial infection.</p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Proximal femoral locking plate (PFLCP) is simple, stable for fixation with fewer complications, and is an effective method for unstable intertrochanteric fractures.  Comparing with DHS group, the locking plate has shorter operative time, fewer blood loss and drainage.</p>

scholarly journals Is There Evidence that the Percutaneous Compression Plate Method of Internal Fixation for Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures Leads to Better Intraoperative and Postoperative Outcomes than the Dynamic Hip Screw?

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 117956031877775 ◽  
Author(s):  
James M Halle-Smith ◽  
Alasdair JA Carnegy ◽  
Richard Carr ◽  
Arhfat Ahmed ◽  
Robert Wooley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Hip Fractures ◽  
Mortality Rates ◽  
Dynamic Hip Screw ◽  
Postoperative Outcomes ◽  
Compression Plate ◽  
Hip Screw ◽  
Percutaneous Compression Plate

Background: Hip fractures are common, expensive and lead to considerable morbidity and mortality. An ageing population in the United Kingdom means that rates of this injury are increasing, making them a pressing public health issue. The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommends that extramedullary implants are used over intramedullary nails to fix intertrochanteric fractures, which make up half of all hip fractures. However, there is currently no guidance on the preferred type of extramedullary device whether this be the commonly used dynamic hip screw (DHS) or another newer device. It has been suggested that a percutaneous compression plate (PCCP) can reduce complications and improve functional outcome compared with the traditional DHS. Review Question: In patients with intertrochanteric hip fractures, is the PCCP more effective than the DHS in terms of relevant intraoperative and postoperative outcomes such as blood loss, implant failure, and mortality? Literature Search: We first searched for relevant information in the NICE Clinical Guideline on Hip Fracture Management (CG124), then National Health Service (NHS) evidence for Clinical Knowledge Summaries, then the Cochrane library for systematic reviews. Finally, we conducted an electronic search of the PubMed database. Review Findings: We selected five systematic reviews and eight primary studies for review. The main findings were that the PCCP was associated with significantly less blood loss, fewer blood transfusions, and shorter operating times compared with the DHS. However, no significant differences were found in postoperative pain, orthopaedic performance, and mortality rates between the two methods. There was no comparison of cost-effectiveness between the two methods. Conclusions: The PCCP is superior to the DHS in terms of intraoperative blood loss and, potentially, non-orthopaedic postoperative complications such as deep vein thrombosis and nosocomial infection. However, there was no significant difference in mortality rates between the two methods. Current studies on this topic have several methodological issues and some are of relatively poor quality. Further higher quality research and cost-effectiveness are necessary to further evaluate the efficacy of these methods.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document