scholarly journals Evaluation of dynamic hip screw plate v/s proximal femoral nail for unstable inter-trochanteric fracture femur

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pundkar AG ◽  
Modi NS ◽  
RW baitule ◽  
GN Pundkar
Author(s):  
E. S. Radhe Shyam ◽  
K. Ashwin

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> The incidence of inter trochanteric fracture is expected to have doubled by 2040. Inter trochanteric fractures account for about 45% to 50% of all hip fractures in the elderly populationand out of these, near about 50% to 60% are classified as unstable intertrochanteric fractures. The goal of treatment is restoring mobility safely and efficiently, while minimizing the risk of medical complications and technical failure. This study as performed<strong> </strong>to assess functional outcome with dynamic hip screw and proximal femoral nail in intertrochanteric fracture management.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> It was prospective observational study done for a period of 1year from January 2016-January 2017 among patients who attended OPD or emergency department with intertrochanteric fracture. Two different implants were used dynamic hip screw (DHS) and proximal femoral nail (PFN).<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Excellent results in functional outcome was more in case of PFN (66.6%) compared to DHS (50%). The type of trauma in DHS group was road traffic accident in 38.8%, domestic fall in 50% and others such as assault was in 11.1% while in PFN group intertrochanteric fracture was seen in 61.1% due to domestic fall.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> The functional outcome was more better with proximal femoral nail (PFN) compared to dynamic hip screw (DHS). Therefore, proximal femoral nail (PFN) should be preferred for management of intertrochanteric fractures.</p>


Author(s):  
Shivanand C Mayi ◽  
Sachin Shah ◽  
Sadashiv R Jidgekar ◽  
Arunkumar Kulkarni

<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


2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (3c) ◽  
pp. 151-155
Author(s):  
Dr. Amaradeep G ◽  
Dr. Ravikumar HS ◽  
Dr. Manjappa CN ◽  
Dr. Shiva Kumar NH ◽  
Dr. Mahendra Kumar KL

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 222-225
Author(s):  
Manoj Kandel ◽  
Robin Shrestha ◽  
Krishna Prasad Poudel ◽  
Shrawan Thapa ◽  
Sushil Thapa ◽  
...  

Background: Dynamic hip screw (DHS) and proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) are the two most commonly used fixation devices for inter-trochanteric fracture of femur. However, many clinical studies have shown lack of differences in the  clinical outcome consistently with between these two fixation techniques. The main objective of this study is to compare the results of dynamic hip screw (DHS) and proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) fixation in elderly patients with unstable inter-trochanteric fractures of femur. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent operative management for inter- trochanteric fractures of femur in our hospital between February 2013 and September 2017. Elderly   patients (Age >60yrs) with unstable inter-trochanteric fracture of femur treated either with DHS fixation or with PFNA fixation were included and divided into two groups: DHS fixation group and PFNA fixation group. The comparative statistical analysis was done between two group using following   parameters: average length of the incision, operation time, blood loss, fracture healing time, and degree of postoperative functional recovery. Results: The mean follow-up period, in DHS fixation group was 16 month (range 12 to 24 months) and in PFNA fixation group was 14 months (range 12 to 18 months). The differences between two groups regarding average length of the incision, operation time, and blood loss were statistically significant (p<0.05) and better in PFNA group whereas the differences between two groups regarding fracture healing time and the degree of postoperative functional recovery were not statistically significant (p >0.05). Conclusions: PFNA fixation may be  better than DHS fixation for the treatment of unstable inter-trochanteric fractures of the femur in the elderly. However, the application and usage of DHS fixation could not be neglected and the choice of treatment depends upon the systemic condition and socioeconomic status of the patient, patient’s preferences, surgeon’s experience and availability of treatment facility.


2009 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 1057-1064 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Zou ◽  
Y Xu ◽  
H Yang

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document