A comparative study of proximal femoral nail and dynamic hip screw for intertrochanteric fractures of the femur

Aabid Husain Ansari, Asif Hussain Ansari
{"title":"A comparative study of proximal femoral nail and dynamic hip screw for intertrochanteric fractures of the femur","authors":"Aabid Husain Ansari, Asif Hussain Ansari","doi":"10.25259/kmj_13_2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\nIntertrochanteric fracture is one of the most common fractures of the hip. However, the implant of choice for type II intertrochanteric fracture is still under debate. The aim of this study was to compare the functional outcomes of proximal femoral nail (PFN) and dynamic hip screw (DHS) in treatment of intertrochanteric fractures.\n\n\n\nWe did a prospective comparative study on 60 patients of type II intertrochanteric fractures operated with closed/open reduction and internal fixation with either DHS or PFN between October 2018 and March 2023. During each follow-up, the functional outcome of patients was calculated using the Harris hip score.\n\n\n\nThere was a statistically significant difference present in average functional scores between the two groups at 1 month, 3 months and 6 months; however, no difference was seen at the end of 12th month follow-up. Functional outcomes in the DHS group were excellent in 34.78%, fair in 17.39%, good in 43.48% and poor in 4.35%. In the PFN group, results were excellent in 56.52%, fair in 8.70% and good in 34.78% and no poor results were seen.\n\n\n\nIn stable two-part intertrochanteric femur fractures, both PFN and DHS are equally effective but due to minimal invasiveness. PFN is a better implant of choice than DHS in the treatment of elderly patients with intertrochanteric fractures.\n","PeriodicalId":513551,"journal":{"name":"Karnataka Medical Journal","volume":"9 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Karnataka Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/kmj_13_2024","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

Intertrochanteric fracture is one of the most common fractures of the hip. However, the implant of choice for type II intertrochanteric fracture is still under debate. The aim of this study was to compare the functional outcomes of proximal femoral nail (PFN) and dynamic hip screw (DHS) in treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. We did a prospective comparative study on 60 patients of type II intertrochanteric fractures operated with closed/open reduction and internal fixation with either DHS or PFN between October 2018 and March 2023. During each follow-up, the functional outcome of patients was calculated using the Harris hip score. There was a statistically significant difference present in average functional scores between the two groups at 1 month, 3 months and 6 months; however, no difference was seen at the end of 12th month follow-up. Functional outcomes in the DHS group were excellent in 34.78%, fair in 17.39%, good in 43.48% and poor in 4.35%. In the PFN group, results were excellent in 56.52%, fair in 8.70% and good in 34.78% and no poor results were seen. In stable two-part intertrochanteric femur fractures, both PFN and DHS are equally effective but due to minimal invasiveness. PFN is a better implant of choice than DHS in the treatment of elderly patients with intertrochanteric fractures.
股骨近端钉和动态髋关节螺钉治疗股骨转子间骨折的比较研究
转子间骨折是最常见的髋部骨折之一。然而,对于 II 型转子间骨折的植入物选择仍存在争议。本研究旨在比较股骨近端钉(PFN)和动态髋螺钉(DHS)在治疗转子间骨折中的功能预后。我们在2018年10月至2023年3月期间对60例采用闭合/开放复位和内固定术的II型转子间骨折患者进行了前瞻性比较研究,患者采用的是DHS或PFN。在每次随访期间,使用 Harris 髋关节评分计算患者的功能结果。两组患者在 1 个月、3 个月和 6 个月时的平均功能评分存在显著统计学差异;但在 12 个月随访结束时未见差异。在 DHS 组中,34.78% 的患者功能结果为优秀,17.39% 的患者为一般,43.48% 的患者为良好,4.35% 的患者为较差。对于稳定的两部分股骨转子间骨折,PFN 和 DHS 同样有效,但由于创伤极小。在治疗老年股骨转子间骨折患者时,PFN是比DHS更好的植入物选择。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信