Cargando…

A Comparative Study of Dynamic Hip Screw Versus Multiple Cannulated Compression Screw Fixation in Undisplaced Intracapsular Neck of Femur Fractures

Background Femoral neck fractures are common injuries. Although many studies have compared two-hole dynamic hip screw (DHS) versus multiple cannulated cancellous screw (CCS) fixation for undisplaced intracapsular fractured neck of femurs (NOF), there is no consensus on which surgical technique resul...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cullen, Samuel E, Sephton, Benjamin, Malik, Isfand, Aldarragi, Ameer, Crossdale, Martin, O’Connor, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9759363/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36540527
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.31619
_version_ 1784852213611364352
author Cullen, Samuel E
Sephton, Benjamin
Malik, Isfand
Aldarragi, Ameer
Crossdale, Martin
O’Connor, Michael
author_facet Cullen, Samuel E
Sephton, Benjamin
Malik, Isfand
Aldarragi, Ameer
Crossdale, Martin
O’Connor, Michael
author_sort Cullen, Samuel E
collection PubMed
description Background Femoral neck fractures are common injuries. Although many studies have compared two-hole dynamic hip screw (DHS) versus multiple cannulated cancellous screw (CCS) fixation for undisplaced intracapsular fractured neck of femurs (NOF), there is no consensus on which surgical technique results in better outcomes. The aim of our study was to compare DHS and CCS for undisplaced NOFs. The primary outcomes were reoperation and mortality rates at one year postoperatively. Methodology A retrospective analysis was performed involving all patients who underwent fixation with DHS/CCS for an undisplaced intracapsular NOF at our hospital between January 2016 and December 2020. All patients had a minimum follow-up time greater than one year. All patients underwent a standardised NOF protocol. Patients either underwent DHS or CCS fixation according to surgeon preference, and there was no randomisation to either group. Results A total of 41 patients underwent fixation with DHS compared to 32 who underwent CCS. The reoperation rate at one year was 9.8% in the DHS group compared to 6.3% in the CCS group. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.588). The one-year mortality rate was similar between groups at 22.0% and 21.9% in the DHS group and the CCS group, respectively (p = 0.994). Registrar-level surgeons performed 80.5% of DHS compared to 59.4% of CCS, and consultant surgeons performed 4.9% of DHS compared to 25% of CCS. Conclusions There was no significant difference in revision rates or complications seen between CCS and DHS. A significantly higher percentage of CCS fixations were performed by consultant-grade surgeons at our hospital compared to DHS. This study provides further data on the choice of fixation method for intracapsular fractures. It also reports on the grade of the operating surgeon at our unit, which may be a factor in the quality of fixation and ultimately reoperation rates.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9759363
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97593632022-12-19 A Comparative Study of Dynamic Hip Screw Versus Multiple Cannulated Compression Screw Fixation in Undisplaced Intracapsular Neck of Femur Fractures Cullen, Samuel E Sephton, Benjamin Malik, Isfand Aldarragi, Ameer Crossdale, Martin O’Connor, Michael Cureus Orthopedics Background Femoral neck fractures are common injuries. Although many studies have compared two-hole dynamic hip screw (DHS) versus multiple cannulated cancellous screw (CCS) fixation for undisplaced intracapsular fractured neck of femurs (NOF), there is no consensus on which surgical technique results in better outcomes. The aim of our study was to compare DHS and CCS for undisplaced NOFs. The primary outcomes were reoperation and mortality rates at one year postoperatively. Methodology A retrospective analysis was performed involving all patients who underwent fixation with DHS/CCS for an undisplaced intracapsular NOF at our hospital between January 2016 and December 2020. All patients had a minimum follow-up time greater than one year. All patients underwent a standardised NOF protocol. Patients either underwent DHS or CCS fixation according to surgeon preference, and there was no randomisation to either group. Results A total of 41 patients underwent fixation with DHS compared to 32 who underwent CCS. The reoperation rate at one year was 9.8% in the DHS group compared to 6.3% in the CCS group. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.588). The one-year mortality rate was similar between groups at 22.0% and 21.9% in the DHS group and the CCS group, respectively (p = 0.994). Registrar-level surgeons performed 80.5% of DHS compared to 59.4% of CCS, and consultant surgeons performed 4.9% of DHS compared to 25% of CCS. Conclusions There was no significant difference in revision rates or complications seen between CCS and DHS. A significantly higher percentage of CCS fixations were performed by consultant-grade surgeons at our hospital compared to DHS. This study provides further data on the choice of fixation method for intracapsular fractures. It also reports on the grade of the operating surgeon at our unit, which may be a factor in the quality of fixation and ultimately reoperation rates. Cureus 2022-11-17 /pmc/articles/PMC9759363/ /pubmed/36540527 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.31619 Text en Copyright © 2022, Cullen et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Orthopedics
Cullen, Samuel E
Sephton, Benjamin
Malik, Isfand
Aldarragi, Ameer
Crossdale, Martin
O’Connor, Michael
A Comparative Study of Dynamic Hip Screw Versus Multiple Cannulated Compression Screw Fixation in Undisplaced Intracapsular Neck of Femur Fractures
title A Comparative Study of Dynamic Hip Screw Versus Multiple Cannulated Compression Screw Fixation in Undisplaced Intracapsular Neck of Femur Fractures
title_full A Comparative Study of Dynamic Hip Screw Versus Multiple Cannulated Compression Screw Fixation in Undisplaced Intracapsular Neck of Femur Fractures
title_fullStr A Comparative Study of Dynamic Hip Screw Versus Multiple Cannulated Compression Screw Fixation in Undisplaced Intracapsular Neck of Femur Fractures
title_full_unstemmed A Comparative Study of Dynamic Hip Screw Versus Multiple Cannulated Compression Screw Fixation in Undisplaced Intracapsular Neck of Femur Fractures
title_short A Comparative Study of Dynamic Hip Screw Versus Multiple Cannulated Compression Screw Fixation in Undisplaced Intracapsular Neck of Femur Fractures
title_sort comparative study of dynamic hip screw versus multiple cannulated compression screw fixation in undisplaced intracapsular neck of femur fractures
topic Orthopedics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9759363/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36540527
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.31619
work_keys_str_mv AT cullensamuele acomparativestudyofdynamichipscrewversusmultiplecannulatedcompressionscrewfixationinundisplacedintracapsularneckoffemurfractures
AT sephtonbenjamin acomparativestudyofdynamichipscrewversusmultiplecannulatedcompressionscrewfixationinundisplacedintracapsularneckoffemurfractures
AT malikisfand acomparativestudyofdynamichipscrewversusmultiplecannulatedcompressionscrewfixationinundisplacedintracapsularneckoffemurfractures
AT aldarragiameer acomparativestudyofdynamichipscrewversusmultiplecannulatedcompressionscrewfixationinundisplacedintracapsularneckoffemurfractures
AT crossdalemartin acomparativestudyofdynamichipscrewversusmultiplecannulatedcompressionscrewfixationinundisplacedintracapsularneckoffemurfractures
AT oconnormichael acomparativestudyofdynamichipscrewversusmultiplecannulatedcompressionscrewfixationinundisplacedintracapsularneckoffemurfractures
AT cullensamuele comparativestudyofdynamichipscrewversusmultiplecannulatedcompressionscrewfixationinundisplacedintracapsularneckoffemurfractures
AT sephtonbenjamin comparativestudyofdynamichipscrewversusmultiplecannulatedcompressionscrewfixationinundisplacedintracapsularneckoffemurfractures
AT malikisfand comparativestudyofdynamichipscrewversusmultiplecannulatedcompressionscrewfixationinundisplacedintracapsularneckoffemurfractures
AT aldarragiameer comparativestudyofdynamichipscrewversusmultiplecannulatedcompressionscrewfixationinundisplacedintracapsularneckoffemurfractures
AT crossdalemartin comparativestudyofdynamichipscrewversusmultiplecannulatedcompressionscrewfixationinundisplacedintracapsularneckoffemurfractures
AT oconnormichael comparativestudyofdynamichipscrewversusmultiplecannulatedcompressionscrewfixationinundisplacedintracapsularneckoffemurfractures