Iatrogenic subtrochanteric fractures are rarely encountered after cannulated screw fixation of femoral neck fractures; however, when they do occur, there can be several complications. Many orthopedic surgeons have concerns about the potential for iatrogenic subtrochanteric fractures after screw fixation distal to the trochanter minor; therefore, some surgeons are typically reluctant to perform this procedure. This study focused on the risk of an iatrogenic subtrochanteric fracture after treating femoral neck fractures with cannulated screws. The main purpose of the study was to understand iatrogenic subtrochanteric fractures and evaluate the effects on these fractures of an inverted triangular-shaped configuration for placement of the cannulated screws. A femur bone with an femoral neck fracture at a 40° incline to the horizontal plane was generated along with a representation of a three-dimensional finite element model, and three inverted triangular-shaped configurations for placement of the cannulated screws were investigated using finite element analyses. Statistical results indicated that the occurrence risk of ISF increases when the screw is located distal to the trochanter minor. Moreover, the risk of occurrence of intertrochanteric fracture increases when the screw is located medial to the trochanter minor because of local concentrated stress on the surface of the screw canals. To avoid the vulnerability of the subtrochanteric region, it was found that proximal placement of the screws using the inverted triangular-shaped configuration could yield better results. In addition, the results of this study provide suggestions on improved screw configurations.

No abstract

No abstract

Femoral neck fractures (FNFs) are among the most common types of hip fractures. Particularly in young patients, these fractures require adequate fixation. These fractures, which are prevalent in elderly patients, are usually treated with implant applications. In implant applications, it is possible to find many different fixation configurations with various implant materials. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of metallic implant materials on fixation performance in the application of cannulated screws in an inverted triangle (CSIT), which are most preferred by orthopedic surgeons. Therefore, a femur bone with a type 2 fracture was numerically modeled and performances of CSIT implants with different biocompatible metals were investigated over nonlinear finite-element analyses (FEA). Within the study, stainless steel (SS), pure titanium (pTi), titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V), cobalt–chromium alloy (Co–Cr), and magnesium alloy (WE43) materials, frequently used as biocompatible implant materials, were taken into consideration and their performances were evaluated under static, vibration, and fatigue analyses. Throughout the comparison of analysis results and an optimality indicator formula, the optimum material was found to be the Co–Cr alloy on the basis of considered performance characteristics.

Objective: Reverse oblique (RO) and transverse intertrochanteric fracture patterns constitute a challenge for the operating surgeon. Currently, no gold standard fixation method exists. This study aimed to retrospectively compare proximal femoral nail (PFN) to dynamic condylar screw (DCS) plating in the treatment of RO and transverse intertrochanteric fractures.Methods: A total of 61 patients fixated by PFN or DCS were included. Of these, 36 were treated with PFN (21 females and 15 males; mean age: 65.52 years), and 25 were treated with DCS (12 females and 13 males; mean age: 59.36 years). The mean follow-up time was 33.8 and 42.6 months (range: 24-108). Radiological evaluation included the quality of fracture reduction, neck-shaft angle change, posteromedial support presence, and bone union time. Complications such as mechanical failure, nonunion, and infection were noted.Results: The only significant differences between the fixation methods were the superiority of DCS over PFN in earlier fracture union time (mean values: 8.9 versus 14.1 weeks) and the superiority (p=0.007) of PFN in shorter hospital stay (3.4 days versus 5.1 days). No significant difference was observed in radiological parameters. While similar mechanical complication rates were found, a significantly higher nonunion rate was detected with the DCS. Conclusion:The most crucial disadvantage of DCS was the high rate of nonunion. Closed fracture reduction in PFN seems to be the most critical parameter to prevent severe complications. The open reduction using DCS showed no advantages over closed reduction and PFN fixation in providing a more anatomical alignment in AO/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) 31-A3 fractures. However, we recommend PFN application in this type of fracture, since nonunion is more common in DCS.