scholarly journals Role of Biplane double support screw fixation for fracture neck of femur in elderly population

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Ahmed Hawam ◽  
Ahmed Akar ◽  
Mohammed Elmarghany
2021 ◽  
pp. 53-56
Author(s):  
Vijayaselvan S ◽  
Venkatachalam K

Fracture Neck of Femur are common and one among the most challenging Orthopaedic trauma cases. Many a factors like age, time elapsed after occurrence of injury, presence of other musculo-skeletal trauma and presence of other co-morbid conditions, are all to be taken into account, before embarking on any surgical intervention. Given the precarious blood supply of the femoral head, AVN of the femoral head is a signicant complication in the displaced fractures. Among the various classication systems available, the Garden classication is still in vogue, as highlighted by Guyton J.L et al; (1). The purpose of this prospective study, is to establish the superiority or otherwise of the 'Four Quadrant Peripheral Parallel (FQPP) Screw Fixation” technique, over the “Biplanar Double Support Screw Fixation (BDSF)” technique, when opting for multiple percutaneous cancellous screw xation, for fracture neck of femur. The age group in our study included patients from 26 years to 55 years and had a total of 18 patients, who were recruited in between March 2018 to February 2020. Of these 18 patients, 9 patients were treated by the FQPP technique and another 9 patients by the BDSF technique. All cases were followed-up for at least 1 year (range: 12 to 35 months, mean 18 months). Evaluation was done by Harris Hip Score (HHS) (2). In the FQPP group, 55.56% (n=5) patients had good to excellent results, 22.22% (n=2) patients had fair and 22.22% (n=2) patients had poor outcomes. In the BDSF group 66.67% (n=6) patients had good to excellent results, 22.22% (n=2) patients had fair and 11.11% (n=1) patient had poor outcome. Thus, the results were only just marginally better for the BDSF group, in comparison to the FQPP group and hence, no substantial deductions could be made favoring the superiority of one xation type over the other.


2020 ◽  
pp. 73-75
Author(s):  
Ravi Kumar ◽  
Chandan Kumar

Introduction: Intracapsular fractures of the proximal femur form a major share of fractures in the 77 elderly. Hip replacement arthroplasty (partial or total) is emerging as a most viable treatment option, and in that, hemiarthroplasty with the Austin Moore Prosthesis is among the most commonly employed. In our study, we have made an attempt to assess the functional status at long term follow up after hemiarthroplasty with the AMP, used in the treatment of fracture neck of femur in the elderly population, and to substantiate the use of the prosthesis in modern day orthopaedic practice. Materials and : A retrospective study was carried out in patients above the age of 60 years, who had been diagnosed with non-pathological fracture neck of femur, treated operatively with hemiarthroplasty using the Austin Moore prosthesis in a tertiary care centre. A minimum follow up period of two years was considered. All the patients were evaluated clinically, and wherever possible, radiologically. Functional outcome was assessed based on the Harris Hip scoring system, and the results were analysed. Radiologically, an attempt was made to assess, among others, the amount of protrusio acetabuli at follow up, and femoral offset changes following hemiarthroplasty with the AMP. Results: In our study, we observed a positive functional outcome (excellent or good) in 9(45%) patients, with fair result in 6(30%) and poor in 5(25%). However, when pain alone was taken as criteria for assessment, upto 14(75%) patients had none to slight pain at follow up, and only 1(5%) patient had marked pain. Walking distance was significantly reduced in 6(30%) patients, who were either confined indoors or bedridden, but in only 1(5%) of them, the cause for the decreased ambulatory status was implant or procedure related (pain). Among the complications, 1 patient had a post-operative periprosthetic fracture that healed subsequently, 2 patients had marked osteolysis around the stem of the prosthesis, and only 1 patient had a radiological evidence of protrusio acetabuli. Discussion: Hemiarthroplasty with Austin Moore Prosthesis for fracture neck of femur remains a fairly good treatment option in elderly patients.


Author(s):  
Varun Vijay ◽  
Naveen Srivastava

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Fracture neck of femur has always presented a great challenge to the orthopaedic surgeons. It is rightly called as “unsolved fracture” as far as treatment and results are concerned. Results generally depend upon time period elapsed from fracture to surgery, adequacy of reduction and fixation. Fixation with cannulated cancellous screw is usually adequate for femoral neck fractures. The aim of the study was to analyse the results of treatment of fracture neck of femur with cannulated cancellous screw fixation and to compare the results with others in the literature using the same modality.  </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> 25 patients with intra capsular neck of femur fracture were followed for a period of two years post-surgery and their functional outcome was assessed based upon harris hip scoring system.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> According to harris hip scoring system, we had excellent results in 72% cases, good in 16% cases, fair in 8% and poor in 4%. One patient went into non-union and two developed avascular necrosis of femoral head.</p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Management of intracapsular fracture neck of femur with cannulated cancellous screw fixation is a very good method of treatment being a surgically easy procedure. Use of multiple cannulated cancellous screw have a compression effect at the fracture site. It also avoids re displacement and rotation.</p>


2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 59
Author(s):  
ChandraPrakash Pal ◽  
KaushalKumar Pruthi ◽  
Pulkesh Singh ◽  
Harish Kumar

Injury Extra ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 129-130
Author(s):  
M. Yasin ◽  
F. Younis ◽  
S. Stacey ◽  
C. Bailey ◽  
S. Hodgson

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document