Comparison of Dynamic Versus Static Lag Screw Modes for Short Cephalomedullary Nails in the Treatment of Unstable Intertrochanteric Fractures: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Naruepol Ruangsillapanan, MD, Tana Rattanakitkoson, MD, Teerayut Ittimongkonkul, MD
{"title":"Comparison of Dynamic Versus Static Lag Screw Modes for Short Cephalomedullary Nails in the Treatment of Unstable Intertrochanteric Fractures: A Randomized Controlled Trial","authors":"Naruepol Ruangsillapanan, MD, Tana Rattanakitkoson, MD, Teerayut Ittimongkonkul, MD","doi":"10.56929/jseaortho.v46i2.156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: To compare the static locked and sliding proximal lag screw modes of short cephalomedullary nail in the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fractures.\nMethods: Ninety-four patients (age>60 years) with low energy unstable intertrochanteric fractures were randomized for treatment into two groups. They were treated with static and sliding proximal lag screw modes of short cephalomedullary nail. The pre-operative variables, operative time, fluoroscopy time, blood loss, tip apex distance, and reduction quality were recorded for each patient. Post-operative follow-ups were undertaken every other week until bone union or implant failure occurred. Plain anteroposterior and lateral radiographs (both hip) were obtained at all visits. Ipsilateral leg length discrepancy (LLD), radiographic union score for hip complications, and fixation failure were recorded.\nResults: The mean follow-up time was 16.7 months (range 12–24). The mean bone union times of static locked (n=35) and sliding proximal (n=34) screw mode groups were 12.4 weeks and more than 11.2 weeks, respectively; the difference was not significant (p=0.213). The ipsilateral LLD of the sliding proximal (mean 4 mm) and static locked (mean 2 mm) screw mode groups showed a statistically significant difference (p<0.001). Post-operative complications (lag screw perforated to hip joint, lag screw cutout from the femoral head, and excessive inferolateral lag screw sliding) developed in 8.82% patients in sliding proximal group, whereas, no complications were reported in the static locked group.\nConclusions: Treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fracture using static locked proximal lag screw mode of cephalomedullary nail showed some advantages over sliding proximal lag screw in terms of less complication and ipsilateral LLD; however, the bone union times were not different. Therefore, a static locked proximal screw mode is preferable over sliding proximal screw mode in treating unstable intertrochanteric fractures.","PeriodicalId":333749,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Southeast Asian Orthopaedics","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Southeast Asian Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56929/jseaortho.v46i2.156","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the static locked and sliding proximal lag screw modes of short cephalomedullary nail in the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fractures. Methods: Ninety-four patients (age>60 years) with low energy unstable intertrochanteric fractures were randomized for treatment into two groups. They were treated with static and sliding proximal lag screw modes of short cephalomedullary nail. The pre-operative variables, operative time, fluoroscopy time, blood loss, tip apex distance, and reduction quality were recorded for each patient. Post-operative follow-ups were undertaken every other week until bone union or implant failure occurred. Plain anteroposterior and lateral radiographs (both hip) were obtained at all visits. Ipsilateral leg length discrepancy (LLD), radiographic union score for hip complications, and fixation failure were recorded. Results: The mean follow-up time was 16.7 months (range 12–24). The mean bone union times of static locked (n=35) and sliding proximal (n=34) screw mode groups were 12.4 weeks and more than 11.2 weeks, respectively; the difference was not significant (p=0.213). The ipsilateral LLD of the sliding proximal (mean 4 mm) and static locked (mean 2 mm) screw mode groups showed a statistically significant difference (p<0.001). Post-operative complications (lag screw perforated to hip joint, lag screw cutout from the femoral head, and excessive inferolateral lag screw sliding) developed in 8.82% patients in sliding proximal group, whereas, no complications were reported in the static locked group. Conclusions: Treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fracture using static locked proximal lag screw mode of cephalomedullary nail showed some advantages over sliding proximal lag screw in terms of less complication and ipsilateral LLD; however, the bone union times were not different. Therefore, a static locked proximal screw mode is preferable over sliding proximal screw mode in treating unstable intertrochanteric fractures.
动态与静态拉力短头髓内钉治疗不稳定粗隆间骨折的比较:一项随机对照试验
目的:比较头髓短钉静态锁定与滑动近端拉力螺钉方式治疗不稳定转子间骨折的疗效。方法:94例年龄>60岁的低能不稳定转子间骨折患者随机分为两组治疗。采用静、滑动头髓短钉近端拉力螺钉方式治疗。记录每位患者的术前变量、手术时间、透视时间、出血量、针尖间距、复位质量。术后随访每隔一周进行一次,直到骨愈合或种植体失败。在所有就诊时均获得平位正位和侧位x线片(双髋)。记录同侧腿长差异(LLD)、髋关节并发症的x线愈合评分和固定失败。结果:平均随访时间16.7个月(12 ~ 24个月)。静态锁定螺钉组(n=35)和近端滑动螺钉组(n=34)的平均骨愈合时间分别为12.4周和11.2周以上;差异无统计学意义(p=0.213)。近端滑动螺钉组(平均4 mm)和静态锁定螺钉组(平均2 mm)的同侧LLD差异有统计学意义(p<0.001)。近端滑动组有8.82%的患者出现术后并发症(拉力螺钉穿孔至髋关节、螺钉从股骨头拔出、拉力螺钉在外侧过度滑动),而静态锁定组无并发症报告。结论:静态锁定头髓钉近端拉力螺钉治疗不稳定股骨粗隆间骨折,在并发症少、同侧LLD方面优于滑动近端拉力螺钉;然而,骨愈合时间没有不同。因此,在治疗不稳定转子间骨折时,静态锁定近端螺钉模式优于滑动近端螺钉模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信