More postoperative femoral fractures with the Gamma nail than the sliding screw plate in the treatment of trochanteric fractures

Osnes, E.; Lofthus, C. M.; Falch, Jan A.; Meyer, Haakon E; Stensvold, Inger; Kristiansen, Ivar Sønbø; Nordsletten, Lars

doi:10.1080/00016470152846574

Cited by 62 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In a prospective, randomized trial of 400 intertrochanteric fractures randomized to either a Gamma nail (Stryker Medical, Mahwah, NJ) or SHS, Adams et al reported 1-year revision surgery rates of 6% for the IMN and 4% for the SHS [1]. In a retrospective review of 921 pertrochanteric fractures treated in Oslo, Norway, Osnes et al reported revision surgery rates of 11.7% for fractures stabilized using a Gamma nail and 8.1% for those treated with a SHS [30]. Parker and Handoll, comparing use of a cephalomedullary nail with a SHS for stabilization of extracapsular hip fractures, reported the short IMN was associated with a significantly greater revision surgery rate than a SHS (relative risk, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.12-2.18) [33].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is a Sliding Hip Screw or IM Nail the Preferred Implant for Intertrochanteric Fracture Fixation?

Aros¹,

Tosteson

Gottlieb

et al. 2008

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is a Sliding Hip Screw or IM Nail the Preferred Implant for Intertrochanteric Fracture Fixation?

Aros¹,

Tosteson

Gottlieb

et al. 2008

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regardless of the functional outcome measure used in the present study, we did not detect any significant difference between the two implant groups during follow-up, which is in agreement with the findings of recent meta-analyses 1,2,22 . Since the introduction of nailing for intertrochanteric fractures, peri-implant femoral fractures have been well-known complications [23][24][25][26] . According to Bhandari et al 19 , this should no longer be an issue with modern nail designs and more experience; however, the authors of a Cochrane review 1 came to a different conclusion.…”

Section: O Verall We Found Comparable Results Between Patients Treatmentioning

confidence: 99%

TRIGEN INTERTAN Intramedullary Nail Versus Sliding Hip Screw

Matre

Vinje

Havelin

et al. 2013

Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There are proponents and opponents of both these methods but there is lack of consensus about the best way to manage these fractures. Moreover, there are few studies which compare these two techniques [24][25][26].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proximal femoral nails compared with reverse distal femoral locking plates in intertrochanteric fractures with a compromised lateral wall; a randomised controlled trial

Haq

Manhas

Pankaj

et al. 2014

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose There is no consensus about the best option of internal fixation for unstable intertrochanteric fractures. The aim of the present study was to compare proximal femoral nail (PFN) with contralateral reverse distal femoral locking compression plate (reverse-DFLCP) in the management of unstable intertrochanteric fractures with compromised lateral wall. Method In a randomized controlled study, from November 2011 to October 2012, 40 patients with unstable intertrochanteric fractures with compromised lateral wall (AO 31A 2.2 to 3.3) had osteosynthesis by PFN (n=20) or reverse-DFLCP (n=20). Intraoperative variables compared were duration of surgery, blood loss during surgery, fluoroscopy time and surgeons perception of the surgery. Patients were followed up clinically for a minimum of one year. Functional outcome was assessed by Parker Palmer mobility score (PPMS), Harris hip score (HHS), and Short Form-12. Failure was defined as any condition which would necessitate revision surgery with change of implant. Results Duration of surgery (p=0.022), blood loss during surgery (p=0.008) and fluoroscopy time (p=0.0001) were significantly less in the PFN group than in the reverse-DFLCP group. No significant difference was found in type of reduction, difficulty in reduction and surgeon's perception of surgery. The PFN group had better functional outcome than the reverse-DFLCP group. HHS for the PFN group was 81.53±13.21 and for the reverse-DFLCP group it was 68.43±14.36 (p=0.018). SF-12 physical (p=0.002) and mental component (p=0.007) scores in the PFN group was significantly better than in the reverse-DFLCP group. There was one failure in the PFN group as compared to six in the reverse-DFLCP group (p=0.036). Conclusion Due to favourable intra-operative variables, better functional outcome and lower failure rates, we conclude that PFN is a better implant than reverse-DFLCP for intertrochanteric fractures with compromised lateral wall.

show abstract

More postoperative femoral fractures with the Gamma nail than the sliding screw plate in the treatment of trochanteric fractures

Cited by 62 publications

References 15 publications

Is a Sliding Hip Screw or IM Nail the Preferred Implant for Intertrochanteric Fracture Fixation?

Is a Sliding Hip Screw or IM Nail the Preferred Implant for Intertrochanteric Fracture Fixation?

TRIGEN INTERTAN Intramedullary Nail Versus Sliding Hip Screw

Proximal femoral nails compared with reverse distal femoral locking plates in intertrochanteric fractures with a compromised lateral wall; a randomised controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About