Cargando…

The efficacy of dynamic compression locking system vs. dynamic hip screw in the treatment of femoral neck fractures: a comparative study

BACKGROUND: There is still a lack of consensus on which internal fixation method can better maintain the stability of femoral neck fractures (FNF), promote fracture healing, and reduce postoperative complications such as femoral head necrosis and nonunion. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chang, Jian-Zhong, Xiao, Ya-Ping, Li, Ling, Bei, Ming-Jian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9275283/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35820870
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05631-z
_version_ 1784745457031839744
author Chang, Jian-Zhong
Xiao, Ya-Ping
Li, Ling
Bei, Ming-Jian
author_facet Chang, Jian-Zhong
Xiao, Ya-Ping
Li, Ling
Bei, Ming-Jian
author_sort Chang, Jian-Zhong
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is still a lack of consensus on which internal fixation method can better maintain the stability of femoral neck fractures (FNF), promote fracture healing, and reduce postoperative complications such as femoral head necrosis and nonunion. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the novel dynamic compression locking system (DCLS) versus dynamic hip screw (DHS) in the treatment of FNF. METHODS: Fifty cases of FNF from July 2018 to February 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. According to different treatment methods, they were divided into DCLS group (26 cases) and DHS group (24 cases). Baseline data, intraoperative and postoperative clinical data, reoperation rate, and Harris score were collected to evaluate the clinical efficacy. RESULTS: All patients were followed up for 24 months. All “fractures” were caused by fall. The baseline data of the two groups were comparable (P > 0.05). There weren’t significant differences in the length of hospital stay and mobility after two years postoperatively between the two groups (P > 0.05). The operation time, blood loss, incision length, fluoroscopy times and the degree of femoral neck shortening after two years postoperatively in the DCLS group were significantly less than those in the DHS group (all P < 0.05). Harris score after two years postoperatively in the DCLS group was significantly higher than that in the DHS group (P < 0.05). Although the reoperation rate in the DHS group was slightly higher than that in the DCLS group, it wasn’t statistical significance (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with DHS, DCLS in the treatment of FNF had less surgical trauma, shorter incision length, shorter operation time, lower radiation dose and higher Harris scores. Although the reoperation rate in the DHS group was slightly higher than that in the DCLS group, it wasn’t statistical difference. Further research is needed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9275283
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92752832022-07-13 The efficacy of dynamic compression locking system vs. dynamic hip screw in the treatment of femoral neck fractures: a comparative study Chang, Jian-Zhong Xiao, Ya-Ping Li, Ling Bei, Ming-Jian BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research BACKGROUND: There is still a lack of consensus on which internal fixation method can better maintain the stability of femoral neck fractures (FNF), promote fracture healing, and reduce postoperative complications such as femoral head necrosis and nonunion. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the novel dynamic compression locking system (DCLS) versus dynamic hip screw (DHS) in the treatment of FNF. METHODS: Fifty cases of FNF from July 2018 to February 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. According to different treatment methods, they were divided into DCLS group (26 cases) and DHS group (24 cases). Baseline data, intraoperative and postoperative clinical data, reoperation rate, and Harris score were collected to evaluate the clinical efficacy. RESULTS: All patients were followed up for 24 months. All “fractures” were caused by fall. The baseline data of the two groups were comparable (P > 0.05). There weren’t significant differences in the length of hospital stay and mobility after two years postoperatively between the two groups (P > 0.05). The operation time, blood loss, incision length, fluoroscopy times and the degree of femoral neck shortening after two years postoperatively in the DCLS group were significantly less than those in the DHS group (all P < 0.05). Harris score after two years postoperatively in the DCLS group was significantly higher than that in the DHS group (P < 0.05). Although the reoperation rate in the DHS group was slightly higher than that in the DCLS group, it wasn’t statistical significance (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with DHS, DCLS in the treatment of FNF had less surgical trauma, shorter incision length, shorter operation time, lower radiation dose and higher Harris scores. Although the reoperation rate in the DHS group was slightly higher than that in the DCLS group, it wasn’t statistical difference. Further research is needed. BioMed Central 2022-07-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9275283/ /pubmed/35820870 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05631-z Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Chang, Jian-Zhong
Xiao, Ya-Ping
Li, Ling
Bei, Ming-Jian
The efficacy of dynamic compression locking system vs. dynamic hip screw in the treatment of femoral neck fractures: a comparative study
title The efficacy of dynamic compression locking system vs. dynamic hip screw in the treatment of femoral neck fractures: a comparative study
title_full The efficacy of dynamic compression locking system vs. dynamic hip screw in the treatment of femoral neck fractures: a comparative study
title_fullStr The efficacy of dynamic compression locking system vs. dynamic hip screw in the treatment of femoral neck fractures: a comparative study
title_full_unstemmed The efficacy of dynamic compression locking system vs. dynamic hip screw in the treatment of femoral neck fractures: a comparative study
title_short The efficacy of dynamic compression locking system vs. dynamic hip screw in the treatment of femoral neck fractures: a comparative study
title_sort efficacy of dynamic compression locking system vs. dynamic hip screw in the treatment of femoral neck fractures: a comparative study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9275283/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35820870
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05631-z
work_keys_str_mv AT changjianzhong theefficacyofdynamiccompressionlockingsystemvsdynamichipscrewinthetreatmentoffemoralneckfracturesacomparativestudy
AT xiaoyaping theefficacyofdynamiccompressionlockingsystemvsdynamichipscrewinthetreatmentoffemoralneckfracturesacomparativestudy
AT liling theefficacyofdynamiccompressionlockingsystemvsdynamichipscrewinthetreatmentoffemoralneckfracturesacomparativestudy
AT beimingjian theefficacyofdynamiccompressionlockingsystemvsdynamichipscrewinthetreatmentoffemoralneckfracturesacomparativestudy
AT changjianzhong efficacyofdynamiccompressionlockingsystemvsdynamichipscrewinthetreatmentoffemoralneckfracturesacomparativestudy
AT xiaoyaping efficacyofdynamiccompressionlockingsystemvsdynamichipscrewinthetreatmentoffemoralneckfracturesacomparativestudy
AT liling efficacyofdynamiccompressionlockingsystemvsdynamichipscrewinthetreatmentoffemoralneckfracturesacomparativestudy
AT beimingjian efficacyofdynamiccompressionlockingsystemvsdynamichipscrewinthetreatmentoffemoralneckfracturesacomparativestudy