Retracted: Outcome of Short Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation and Dynamic Hip Screw for Fixation of Unstable Trochanteric Fractures. A Randomised Prospective Comparative Trial

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 531-536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bhavuk Garg ◽  
Kanniraj Marimuthu ◽  
Vijay Kumar ◽  
Rajesh Malhotra ◽  
Prakash P. Kotwal
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Trial ◽  
Dynamic Hip Screw ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail ◽  
Trochanteric Fractures ◽  
Femoral Nail ◽  
Hip Screw ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation

A Comparison of Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation and Dynamic Hip Screw Devices in Trochanteric Fractures

2009 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 1057-1064 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Zou ◽  
Y Xu ◽  
H Yang
Keyword(s):  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Trochanteric Fracture ◽  
Dynamic Hip Screw ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail ◽  
Trochanteric Fractures ◽  
Femoral Nail ◽  
Operation Rate ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hip Screw ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation

This prospective, randomized study compared the functional outcome and complications associated with a proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) device with those of a traditional extramedullary device, the dynamic hip screw (DHS), in patients with trochanteric fracture. A total of 121 patients were randomized to the PFNA group ( n = 58) or the DHS group ( n = 63). Perioperative information and complications were recorded, and assessments of functional outcome were made. The DHS group required a longer operative time and was associated with greater blood loss than the PFNA group. The re-operation rate was lower in the PFNA group compared with the DHS group, especially in patients with unstable fractures, although there was no statistically significant difference in the overall complication rate between the two groups. There were no significant differences in functional outcome between the PFNA and the DHS groups. In conclusion, the PFNA device is useful in the treatment of trochanteric fractures.

A comparison study of proximal femoral nail and dynamic hip screw devices in unstable trochanteric fractures

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 413
Author(s):  
MohamedA Mostafa ◽  
HassanH Ahmed ◽  
HaniA.M Bassiooni ◽  
ElsayedM Mohamady
Keyword(s):  
Dynamic Hip Screw ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail ◽  
Comparison Study ◽  
Trochanteric Fractures ◽  
Femoral Nail ◽  
Hip Screw

scholarly journals Randomized comparative study to evaluate the role of proximal femoral nail and dynamic hip screw in unstable trochanteric fractures

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Shivanand C Mayi ◽  
Sachin Shah ◽  
Sadashiv R Jidgekar ◽  
Arunkumar Kulkarni
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Trochanteric Fracture ◽  
Dynamic Hip Screw ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail ◽  
Trochanteric Fractures ◽  
Stable Fixation ◽  
Femoral Nail ◽  
Duration Of Surgery ◽  
Hip Screw

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Treatment of unstable trochanteric fracture is much more challenging than stable fracture. These fractures require stable fixation to minimize the fracture and implant related complications. Need of this study is to assess the suitable implant for stable fixation of unstable trochanteric fracture with less intra and postoperative complications and good functional outcome.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> In this prospective randomized comparative study, 64 patients were distributed into two groups. Group A consisted of patients treated by proximal femoral nail (PFN) (n=32) and group B treated by dynamic hip screw (DHS) (n=32). All the patients were evaluated preoperatively and surgery was done according to the group they were allotted. Post-operative follow up was done at 6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Average age of the patients in this study was 51.26±10.24 year. In this study patients were followed up for an average of 10.87±2.61 month. The duration of surgery was shorter in PFN group. Weight bearing was earlier in PFN group than DHS group. Mean functional ability score was better in PFN group with significant gain in function earlier as compared to DHS group.</p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> PFN is a better implant for internal fixation of unstable trochanteric fractures which allows early mobilization and has got better functional outcome score in early postoperative period than DHS

scholarly journals Treatment of Trochanteric Fractures with Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation or Dynamic Hip Screw Systems: A Meta-Analysis

2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 839-851 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Zeng ◽  
Y-R Wang ◽  
J Wei ◽  
S-G Gao ◽  
F-J Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Dynamic Hip Screw ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Trochanteric Fractures ◽  
Fixation Failure ◽  
Duration Of Surgery ◽  
Hip Screw ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation

OBJECTIVE: A meta-analysis to compare the intraoperative and postoperative outcome data for the proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) and dynamic hip screw (DHS) implant systems for the treatment of patients with trochanteric fractures. METHODS: A detailed search of several electronic databases was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials published before 5 December 2011 that compared PFNA with DHS in patients with trochanteric fractures. RESULTS: A quantitative meta-analysis of 11 studies including 798 patients was performed. PFNA was associated with significant reductions in duration of surgery (weighted mean difference [WMD] −21.38 min; 95% confidence interval [CI] −33.50, −9.26 min), intraoperative blood loss (WMD −176.36 ml; 95% CI −232.20, −120.52 ml), rate of fixation failure (relative risk [RR] 0.27, 95% CI 0.11, 0.62) and rate of postoperative complications (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.31, 0.70) compared with DHS. CONCLUSION: The use of PFNA for treatment of trochanteric fractures was found to be superior to DHS in terms of the duration of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, and rates of fixation failure and overall complications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document