Aims The aim of this study was to investigate if there are differences in outcome between sliding hip screws (SHSs) and intramedullary nails (IMNs) with regard to fracture stability. Methods We assessed data from 17,341 patients with trochanteric or subtrochanteric fractures treated with SHS or IMN in the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register from 2013 to 2019. Primary outcome measures were reoperations for stable fractures (AO Foundation/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) type A1) and unstable fractures (AO/OTA type A2, A3, and subtrochanteric fractures). Secondary outcome measures were reoperations for A2, A3, and subtrochanteric fractures individually, one-year mortality, quality of life (EuroQol five-dimension three-level index score), pain (visual analogue scale (VAS)), and satisfaction (VAS) for stable and unstable fractures. Hazard rate ratios (HRRs) for reoperation were calculated using Cox regression analysis with adjustments for age, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists score. Results Reoperation rate was lower after surgery with IMN for unstable fractures one year (HRR 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 0.97; p = 0.022) and three years postoperatively (HRR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.99; p = 0.036), compared with SHS. For individual fracture types, no clinically significant differences were found. Lower one-year mortality was found for IMN compared with SHS for stable fractures (HRR 0.87; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.96; p = 0.007), and unstable fractures (HRR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.98; p = 0.014). Conclusion This national register-based study indicates a lower reoperation rate for IMN than SHS for unstable trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures, but not for stable fractures or individual fracture types. The choice of implant may not be decisive to the outcome of treatment for stable trochanteric fractures in terms of reoperation rate. One-year mortality rate for unstable and stable fractures was lower in patients treated with IMN. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(2):274–282.

Background: Intramedullary nails are commonly used in the treatment of trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures. We aimed to compare intramedullary nails in widespread use in Norway on the basis of reoperation risk. Methods: We assessed data from 13,232 trochanteric or subtrochanteric fractures treated with an intramedullary nail and registered in the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register between 2007 and 2019. The primary outcome measure was the risk of reoperation for various types of short and long intramedullary nails. Secondly, we compared risk of reoperation for the selected nails with respect to fracture type (AO/OTA type A1, A2, A3, and subtrochanteric fractures). Cox regression analysis adjusted for sex, age, and American Society of Anesthesiologists class was used to estimate hazard rate ratios (HRRs) for reoperation. Results: The mean patient age was 82.9 years, and 72.8% of the nails were used in the treatment of female patients. We included 8,283 short and 4,949 long nails. A1 fractures accounted for 29.8%, A2 for 40.6%, A3 for 7.2%, and subtrochanteric fractures for 22.4%. When comparing short nails regardless of fracture type, the TRIGEN INTERTAN had an increased risk of reoperation at 1 year (HRR, 1.31 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.03 to 1.66]; p = 0.028) and 3 years (HRR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.07 to 1.61]; p = 0.011) postoperatively compared with the Gamma3. For individual fracture types, we found no significant differences in reoperation risk between the various types of short nails. When comparing long nails, the TRIGEN TAN/FAN had an increased risk of reoperation at 1 year (HRR, 3.05 [95% CI, 2.10 to 4.42]; p < 0.001) and 3 years (HRR, 2.54 [95% CI, 1.82 to 3.54]; p < 0.001) postoperatively compared with the long Gamma3. Conclusions: This study may indicate a slightly increased risk of reoperation for the short TRIGEN INTERTAN compared with other short nails in widespread use in Norway. In analyses of long nails, the TRIGEN TAN/FAN nail was associated with a higher risk of reoperation in the treatment of trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background The literature is inconclusive as to whether an intramedullary nail changes the distribution of a subsequent ipsi- or contralateral fracture of the femur. We have compared the incidence, localisation, and fracture pattern of subsequent femoral fractures after intramedullary nailing of trochanteric or subtrochanteric fractures in patients without previous implants in either femur at the time of surgery. Methods Retrospective analysis was performed of a two-centre cohort of 2012 patients treated with a short or long intramedullary nail for the management of trochanteric or subtrochanteric fracture between January 2005 and December 2018. Subsequent presentations with ipsi- and contralateral femoral fractures were documented. Only patients with no previous femoral surgery performed, other than the index nailing were followed. Odds ratios (ORs) for subsequent femoral fracture were calculated using robust variance estimates in logistic regression. Results The mean age of the cohort was 82.4 years and 72.1% were female. The total number of patients presenting with subsequent femoral fractures was 299 (14.9%). The number of patients presenting with subsequent ipsilateral and contralateral femoral fractures was 51 (2.5%) and 248 (12.3%) respectively (OR 5.0; CI 3.7–6.9). Twenty-six (8.7%) of all subsequent femoral fractures occured in the ipsilateral shaft, 14 (4.7%) in the ipsilateral metaphyseal area, one (0.33%) in the contralateral shaft, and three (1.0%) in the contralateral metaphysis (OR 10; CI 3.6–29). Conclusion An intramedullary nail significantly changes the fracture pattern in the event of a second low-energy trauma, reducing the risk of subsequent proximal ipsilateral femoral fractures and increasing the risk of subsequent ipsilateral femoral fractures in the shaft and distal metaphyseal area compared with the native contralateral femur.