Cargando…
Comparison of the Sliding and Femoral Head Rotation among Three Different Femoral Head Fixation Devices for Trochanteric Fractures
BACKGROUND: Recently, various femoral head fixation devices (HFDs) for trochanteric fractures have become available. However, there are some cases in which femoral head rotation with excessive sliding of the HFD is observed and it is often followed by cutout. The purpose of this study is to compare...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Korean Orthopaedic Association
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4553275/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26330949 http://dx.doi.org/10.4055/cios.2015.7.3.291 |
_version_ | 1782387857936089088 |
---|---|
author | Chinzei, Nobuaki Hiranaka, Takafumi Niikura, Takahiro Tsuji, Mitsuo Kuroda, Ryosuke Doita, Minoru Kurosaka, Masahiro |
author_facet | Chinzei, Nobuaki Hiranaka, Takafumi Niikura, Takahiro Tsuji, Mitsuo Kuroda, Ryosuke Doita, Minoru Kurosaka, Masahiro |
author_sort | Chinzei, Nobuaki |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Recently, various femoral head fixation devices (HFDs) for trochanteric fractures have become available. However, there are some cases in which femoral head rotation with excessive sliding of the HFD is observed and it is often followed by cutout. The purpose of this study is to compare the ability of the three types of HFDs to prevent femoral head rotation. METHODS: Between July 2005 and December 2009, 206 patients aged over 60 years with trochanteric fractures who had undergone surgical treatment using a short femoral nail in our institution were enrolled into the study. We used the gamma 3 nail (GMN) as the screw-type HFD in 66 cases, the gliding nail (GLN) as a non-cylindrical blade in 76 cases, and the proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) as a cylindrical blade in 64 cases. The sliding length of HFDs and the occurrence of femoral head rotation were evaluated by assessing radiographs as the main outcome, and the results were compared among these devices. RESULTS: A comparison of the degree of sliding in the GMN group showed that femoral head rotation was observed significantly more frequently in cases with rotation. Further, it appeared that femoral head rotation occurred more frequently in comminuted fractures. However, no significant differences between the sliding lengths of the different HFDs were observed among three groups. Femoral head rotation was observed in 15 cases of GMN (22.7%), 0 case of GLN, and 5 case of PFNA (7.8%). Significant differences with regard to the occurrence of femoral head rotation were observed among the three groups. Furthermore, significant differences were also observed between GLN and PFNA with respect to the occurrence of femoral head rotation. CONCLUSIONS: The ability to stabilize femoral head appears to be greater with blade-type materials than with screw-type materials. Furthermore, we believe that a non-cylindrical blade is preferable to a cylindrical blade for the surgical treatment of comminuted, unstable trochanteric fractures in order to prevent femoral head rotation and cut-out. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4553275 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | The Korean Orthopaedic Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45532752015-09-01 Comparison of the Sliding and Femoral Head Rotation among Three Different Femoral Head Fixation Devices for Trochanteric Fractures Chinzei, Nobuaki Hiranaka, Takafumi Niikura, Takahiro Tsuji, Mitsuo Kuroda, Ryosuke Doita, Minoru Kurosaka, Masahiro Clin Orthop Surg Original Article BACKGROUND: Recently, various femoral head fixation devices (HFDs) for trochanteric fractures have become available. However, there are some cases in which femoral head rotation with excessive sliding of the HFD is observed and it is often followed by cutout. The purpose of this study is to compare the ability of the three types of HFDs to prevent femoral head rotation. METHODS: Between July 2005 and December 2009, 206 patients aged over 60 years with trochanteric fractures who had undergone surgical treatment using a short femoral nail in our institution were enrolled into the study. We used the gamma 3 nail (GMN) as the screw-type HFD in 66 cases, the gliding nail (GLN) as a non-cylindrical blade in 76 cases, and the proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) as a cylindrical blade in 64 cases. The sliding length of HFDs and the occurrence of femoral head rotation were evaluated by assessing radiographs as the main outcome, and the results were compared among these devices. RESULTS: A comparison of the degree of sliding in the GMN group showed that femoral head rotation was observed significantly more frequently in cases with rotation. Further, it appeared that femoral head rotation occurred more frequently in comminuted fractures. However, no significant differences between the sliding lengths of the different HFDs were observed among three groups. Femoral head rotation was observed in 15 cases of GMN (22.7%), 0 case of GLN, and 5 case of PFNA (7.8%). Significant differences with regard to the occurrence of femoral head rotation were observed among the three groups. Furthermore, significant differences were also observed between GLN and PFNA with respect to the occurrence of femoral head rotation. CONCLUSIONS: The ability to stabilize femoral head appears to be greater with blade-type materials than with screw-type materials. Furthermore, we believe that a non-cylindrical blade is preferable to a cylindrical blade for the surgical treatment of comminuted, unstable trochanteric fractures in order to prevent femoral head rotation and cut-out. The Korean Orthopaedic Association 2015-09 2015-08-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4553275/ /pubmed/26330949 http://dx.doi.org/10.4055/cios.2015.7.3.291 Text en Copyright © 2015 by The Korean Orthopaedic Association http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Chinzei, Nobuaki Hiranaka, Takafumi Niikura, Takahiro Tsuji, Mitsuo Kuroda, Ryosuke Doita, Minoru Kurosaka, Masahiro Comparison of the Sliding and Femoral Head Rotation among Three Different Femoral Head Fixation Devices for Trochanteric Fractures |
title | Comparison of the Sliding and Femoral Head Rotation among Three Different Femoral Head Fixation Devices for Trochanteric Fractures |
title_full | Comparison of the Sliding and Femoral Head Rotation among Three Different Femoral Head Fixation Devices for Trochanteric Fractures |
title_fullStr | Comparison of the Sliding and Femoral Head Rotation among Three Different Femoral Head Fixation Devices for Trochanteric Fractures |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of the Sliding and Femoral Head Rotation among Three Different Femoral Head Fixation Devices for Trochanteric Fractures |
title_short | Comparison of the Sliding and Femoral Head Rotation among Three Different Femoral Head Fixation Devices for Trochanteric Fractures |
title_sort | comparison of the sliding and femoral head rotation among three different femoral head fixation devices for trochanteric fractures |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4553275/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26330949 http://dx.doi.org/10.4055/cios.2015.7.3.291 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chinzeinobuaki comparisonoftheslidingandfemoralheadrotationamongthreedifferentfemoralheadfixationdevicesfortrochantericfractures AT hiranakatakafumi comparisonoftheslidingandfemoralheadrotationamongthreedifferentfemoralheadfixationdevicesfortrochantericfractures AT niikuratakahiro comparisonoftheslidingandfemoralheadrotationamongthreedifferentfemoralheadfixationdevicesfortrochantericfractures AT tsujimitsuo comparisonoftheslidingandfemoralheadrotationamongthreedifferentfemoralheadfixationdevicesfortrochantericfractures AT kurodaryosuke comparisonoftheslidingandfemoralheadrotationamongthreedifferentfemoralheadfixationdevicesfortrochantericfractures AT doitaminoru comparisonoftheslidingandfemoralheadrotationamongthreedifferentfemoralheadfixationdevicesfortrochantericfractures AT kurosakamasahiro comparisonoftheslidingandfemoralheadrotationamongthreedifferentfemoralheadfixationdevicesfortrochantericfractures |