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

Journal of International Medical Research

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 1057-1064

  Zou, J ^a   Xu, Y ^a   Yang, Huilin ^a  

^a SOOCHOW UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Dynamic hip screw (DHS); Outcomes; Proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA); Trochanteric fractures

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DYNAMIC HIP SCREW DEVICE; FEMALE; FEMUR TROCHANTERIC FRACTURE; FIXATION DEVICE; FRACTURE FIXATION; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OPERATION DURATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PROXIMAL FEMORAL NAIL ANTIROTATION DEVICE; REOPERATION; SEX DIFFERENCE; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; BONE NAIL; BONE SCREW; FRACTURE HEALING; HIP FRACTURE; INSTRUMENTATION; INTERNAL FIXATOR; JOINT INSTABILITY; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOSYNTHESIS; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BONE NAILS; BONE SCREWS; FEMALE; FRACTURE FIXATION, INTERNAL; FRACTURE HEALING; HIP FRACTURES; HUMANS; INTERNAL FIXATORS; JOINT INSTABILITY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 70350500665     PISSN: 03000605     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/147323000903700410     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Utrilla AL, Reig JS, Muñoz FM, et al: Trochanteric gamma nail and compression hip screw for trochanteric fractures: a randomized, prospective, comparative study in 210 elderly patients with a new design of the gamma nail. J Orthop Trauma 2005; 19: 229-233.
2. Lunsjö K, Ceder L, Stigsson L, et al: Two-way compression along the shaft and the neck of the femur with the Medoff sliding plate: one-year follow-up of 108 intertrochanteric fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996; 78: 387-390. (Pubitemid 26158823)
3. Simmermacher RK, Bosch AM, Van der Werken C: The AO/ASIF-proximal femoral nail (PFN): a new device for the treatment of unstable proximal femoral fractures. Injury 1999; 30: 327-332.
4. Haynes RC, Pöll RG, Miles AW, et al: Failure of femoral head fixation: a cadaveric analysis of lag screw cut-out with the gamma locking nail and AO dynamic hip screw. Injury 1997; 28: 337-341. (Pubitemid 28010529)
5. Bridle SH, Patel AD, Bircher M, et al: Fixation of intertrochanteric fractures of the femur. A randomised prospective comparison of the gamma nail and the dynamic hip screw. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1991; 73: 330-334.
6. Butt MS, Krikler SJ, Nafie S, et al: Comparison of dynamic hip screw and gamma nail: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Injury 1995; 26: 615-618.
7. Lorich DG, Geller DS, Nielson JH: Osteoporotic pertrochanteric hip fractures. Management and current controversies. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86: 398-410.
8. Takigami I, Matsumoto K, Ohara A, et al: Treatment of trochanteric fractures with the PFNA (proximal femoral nail antirotation) nail system-report of early results. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis 2008; 66: 276-279.
9. Müller ME, Nazarian S, Koch P, et al: The Comprehensive Classification of Fractures of the Long Bones. Berlin: Springer, 1990.
10. Simmermacher RK, Ljungqvist J, Bail H, et al: The new proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) in daily practice: results of a multicentre clinical study. Injury 2008; 39: 932-939.
11. Hoffman R, Haas NP: Femur: proximal. In: AO Principles of Fracture Management (Rüedi TP, Murphy WM, eds). Stuttgart: Thieme, 2000; pp 441-454.
12. Salvati EA, Wilson PD Jr: Long-term results of femoral-head replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1973; 55: 516-524.
13. Pajarinen J, Lindahl J, Michelsson O, et al: Pertrochanteric femoral fractures treated with a dynamic hip screw or a proximal femoral nail. A randomised study comparing post-operative rehabilitation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005; 87: 76-81.
14. Curtis MJ, Jinnah RH, Wilson V, et al: Proximal femoral fractures: a biomechanical study to compare intramedullary and extramedullary fixation. Injury 1994: 25: 99-104. (Pubitemid 24054566)
15. Kim WY, Han CH, Park JI, et al: Failure of intertrochanteric fracture fixation with a dynamic hip screw in relation to pre-operative fracture stability and osteoporosis. Int Orthop 2001: 25: 360-362.
16. Rosenblum SF, Zuckerman JD, Kummer FJ, et al: A biomechanical evaluation of the Gamma nail. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1992: 74: 352-357.
17. Sommers MB, Roth C, Hall H, et al: A laboratory model to evaluate cutout resistance of implants for pertrochanteric fracture fixation. J Orthop Trauma 2004; 18: 361-368. (Pubitemid 39069624)
18. Brown TD, Ferguson AB Jr: Mechanical property distributions in the cancellous bone of the human proximal femur. Acta Orthop Scand 1980; 51: 429-437.
19. Herrera A, Domingo LJ, Calvo A, et al: A comparative study of trochanteric fractures treated with the Gamma nail or the proximal femoral nail. Int Orthop 2002; 26: 365-369. (Pubitemid 36069545)
20. Schipper IB, Steyerberg EW, Castelein RM, et al: Treatment of unstable trochanteric fractures. Randomised comparison of the gamma nail and the proximal femoral nail. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004; 86: 86-94.
21. Pajarinen J, Lindahl J, Michelsson O, et al: Pertrochanteric femoral fractures treated with a dynamic hip screw or a proximal femoral nail. A randomised study comparing post-operative rehabilitation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005; 87: 76-81.