Cargando…

Dynamic hip screw versus intramedullary nailing for the treatment of A1 intertrochanteric fractures: A retrospective, comparative study and cost analysis

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare sliding hip screw and intramedullary nail perioperative results and costs in two-part femoral fractures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2015 and December 2019, a total of 85 patients (70 males, 15 females; mean age: 85.6±9.5 years; range, 33 to 99 years)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alessio-Mazzola, Mattia, Traverso, Giacomo, Coccarello, Francesco, Sanguineti, Francesca, Formica, Matteo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Bayçınar Medical Publishing 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9361108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35852189
http://dx.doi.org/10.52312/jdrs.2022.646
_version_ 1784764461058359296
author Alessio-Mazzola, Mattia
Traverso, Giacomo
Coccarello, Francesco
Sanguineti, Francesca
Formica, Matteo
author_facet Alessio-Mazzola, Mattia
Traverso, Giacomo
Coccarello, Francesco
Sanguineti, Francesca
Formica, Matteo
author_sort Alessio-Mazzola, Mattia
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare sliding hip screw and intramedullary nail perioperative results and costs in two-part femoral fractures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2015 and December 2019, a total of 85 patients (70 males, 15 females; mean age: 85.6±9.5 years; range, 33 to 99 years) who were treated for intertrochanteric two-part femoral fractures were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were stratified and divided into two groups according to type of implant used for surgical fixation: one group treated with intramedullary proximal femoral nail (EBA) and the other with sliding hip screw (DHS). Comorbidity, hemoglobin level (Hb), hematocrit (hct) level, number of transfusions, and days of hospitalization details were evaluated. Postoperative X-rays were analyzed to assess the quality of reduction and to identify non-union, malunion, mechanical failures, and heterotopic ossifications. The modified Harris Hip Score, fracture mobility score, and Parker Mobility Score were calculated. Cost analysis considered the orthopedic device, operating room, transfusion, and hospital costs for the primary hospital stay. RESULTS: Of the patients, 44 were treated with DHS and 41 were treated with EBA nail by a single surgeon. No significant differences were found in the baseline demographic data. There was a significant increased operative time (p<0.001) and decreased fluoroscopy X-ray exposure time (p=0.031) in the subgroup of patients who underwent DHS fixation. The patients who underwent EBA nail fixation had a significantly higher transfusion rate during hospitalization (p=0.001) and a significantly lower Hb level and hct level on postoperative Day 1 and Day 3 (p<0.05). There were no significant differences in the clinical and functional scores, radiographic outcomes and mortality (p>0.05). The patients who underwent intramedullary nail fixation had higher costs. CONCLUSION: Sliding hip screws showed decreased postoperative anemization, lower transfusion rates, and similar clinical outcomes compared to the intramedullary nail for two-part femoral fractures. Sliding hip screws should be preferred for A1 intertrochanteric fractures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9361108
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Bayçınar Medical Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93611082022-08-18 Dynamic hip screw versus intramedullary nailing for the treatment of A1 intertrochanteric fractures: A retrospective, comparative study and cost analysis Alessio-Mazzola, Mattia Traverso, Giacomo Coccarello, Francesco Sanguineti, Francesca Formica, Matteo Jt Dis Relat Surg Original Article OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare sliding hip screw and intramedullary nail perioperative results and costs in two-part femoral fractures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2015 and December 2019, a total of 85 patients (70 males, 15 females; mean age: 85.6±9.5 years; range, 33 to 99 years) who were treated for intertrochanteric two-part femoral fractures were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were stratified and divided into two groups according to type of implant used for surgical fixation: one group treated with intramedullary proximal femoral nail (EBA) and the other with sliding hip screw (DHS). Comorbidity, hemoglobin level (Hb), hematocrit (hct) level, number of transfusions, and days of hospitalization details were evaluated. Postoperative X-rays were analyzed to assess the quality of reduction and to identify non-union, malunion, mechanical failures, and heterotopic ossifications. The modified Harris Hip Score, fracture mobility score, and Parker Mobility Score were calculated. Cost analysis considered the orthopedic device, operating room, transfusion, and hospital costs for the primary hospital stay. RESULTS: Of the patients, 44 were treated with DHS and 41 were treated with EBA nail by a single surgeon. No significant differences were found in the baseline demographic data. There was a significant increased operative time (p<0.001) and decreased fluoroscopy X-ray exposure time (p=0.031) in the subgroup of patients who underwent DHS fixation. The patients who underwent EBA nail fixation had a significantly higher transfusion rate during hospitalization (p=0.001) and a significantly lower Hb level and hct level on postoperative Day 1 and Day 3 (p<0.05). There were no significant differences in the clinical and functional scores, radiographic outcomes and mortality (p>0.05). The patients who underwent intramedullary nail fixation had higher costs. CONCLUSION: Sliding hip screws showed decreased postoperative anemization, lower transfusion rates, and similar clinical outcomes compared to the intramedullary nail for two-part femoral fractures. Sliding hip screws should be preferred for A1 intertrochanteric fractures. Bayçınar Medical Publishing 2022-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9361108/ /pubmed/35852189 http://dx.doi.org/10.52312/jdrs.2022.646 Text en Copyright © 2022, Turkish Joint Diseases Foundation https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Article
Alessio-Mazzola, Mattia
Traverso, Giacomo
Coccarello, Francesco
Sanguineti, Francesca
Formica, Matteo
Dynamic hip screw versus intramedullary nailing for the treatment of A1 intertrochanteric fractures: A retrospective, comparative study and cost analysis
title Dynamic hip screw versus intramedullary nailing for the treatment of A1 intertrochanteric fractures: A retrospective, comparative study and cost analysis
title_full Dynamic hip screw versus intramedullary nailing for the treatment of A1 intertrochanteric fractures: A retrospective, comparative study and cost analysis
title_fullStr Dynamic hip screw versus intramedullary nailing for the treatment of A1 intertrochanteric fractures: A retrospective, comparative study and cost analysis
title_full_unstemmed Dynamic hip screw versus intramedullary nailing for the treatment of A1 intertrochanteric fractures: A retrospective, comparative study and cost analysis
title_short Dynamic hip screw versus intramedullary nailing for the treatment of A1 intertrochanteric fractures: A retrospective, comparative study and cost analysis
title_sort dynamic hip screw versus intramedullary nailing for the treatment of a1 intertrochanteric fractures: a retrospective, comparative study and cost analysis
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9361108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35852189
http://dx.doi.org/10.52312/jdrs.2022.646
work_keys_str_mv AT alessiomazzolamattia dynamichipscrewversusintramedullarynailingforthetreatmentofa1intertrochantericfracturesaretrospectivecomparativestudyandcostanalysis
AT traversogiacomo dynamichipscrewversusintramedullarynailingforthetreatmentofa1intertrochantericfracturesaretrospectivecomparativestudyandcostanalysis
AT coccarellofrancesco dynamichipscrewversusintramedullarynailingforthetreatmentofa1intertrochantericfracturesaretrospectivecomparativestudyandcostanalysis
AT sanguinetifrancesca dynamichipscrewversusintramedullarynailingforthetreatmentofa1intertrochantericfracturesaretrospectivecomparativestudyandcostanalysis
AT formicamatteo dynamichipscrewversusintramedullarynailingforthetreatmentofa1intertrochantericfracturesaretrospectivecomparativestudyandcostanalysis