{"title":"两种固定方法对转子骨折患者失血量的影响:动力髋螺钉与股骨近端防旋钉。","authors":"Mirza Sivro, Faruk Lazović, Ðemil Omerović, Adnan Papović","doi":"10.17392/1616-23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Aim The two most commonly used implants for treatment of trochanteric fractures are the dynamic hip screw (DHS) and proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA). The aim of this study was to evaluate blood loss in patients with trochanteric fracture treated with DHS or PFNA. Methods This retrospective comparative study included 61 patients with trochanteric fracture, who were divided according to a surgical method into DHS and PFNA groups. In the PFNA group, a short third generation gamma-nail was used for osteosynthesis (Supernail GT, Lima Corporate, Italy), and in the DHS group a dynamic hip screw was used (Synthes, Oberdorf, Switzerland). Complete blood count with haemoglobin and haematocrit values was taken preoperatively and on the first day postoperatively and a number of red blood cell transfusions (RBC) were evaluated. Electronic medical records from 2022 were used to collect patient data. Results There were no significant differences in terms of gender and age between the groups (p=0.510 and p=0.087, respectively), as well as in the fracture type distribution (p=0.886). The duration of postoperative hospitalisation was similar between the groups (p=0.643). There was no statistically significant association between the number of RBC transfusions and fixation method (p=0.091), as well as in postoperative haemoglobin and haematocrit levels between the groups (p=0.180 and p=0.225, respectively). Conclusion Both DHS and PFNA implants are safe surgical techniques for the treatment of trochanteric fractures, with similar blood loss, number of blood transfusions and hospital stay.</p>","PeriodicalId":51129,"journal":{"name":"Medicinski Glasnik","volume":"20 2","pages":"249-254"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effects of two fixation methods on blood loss in patients with trochanteric fracture: dynamic hip screw vs. proximal femoral nail anti-rotation.\",\"authors\":\"Mirza Sivro, Faruk Lazović, Ðemil Omerović, Adnan Papović\",\"doi\":\"10.17392/1616-23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Aim The two most commonly used implants for treatment of trochanteric fractures are the dynamic hip screw (DHS) and proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA). The aim of this study was to evaluate blood loss in patients with trochanteric fracture treated with DHS or PFNA. Methods This retrospective comparative study included 61 patients with trochanteric fracture, who were divided according to a surgical method into DHS and PFNA groups. In the PFNA group, a short third generation gamma-nail was used for osteosynthesis (Supernail GT, Lima Corporate, Italy), and in the DHS group a dynamic hip screw was used (Synthes, Oberdorf, Switzerland). Complete blood count with haemoglobin and haematocrit values was taken preoperatively and on the first day postoperatively and a number of red blood cell transfusions (RBC) were evaluated. Electronic medical records from 2022 were used to collect patient data. Results There were no significant differences in terms of gender and age between the groups (p=0.510 and p=0.087, respectively), as well as in the fracture type distribution (p=0.886). The duration of postoperative hospitalisation was similar between the groups (p=0.643). There was no statistically significant association between the number of RBC transfusions and fixation method (p=0.091), as well as in postoperative haemoglobin and haematocrit levels between the groups (p=0.180 and p=0.225, respectively). Conclusion Both DHS and PFNA implants are safe surgical techniques for the treatment of trochanteric fractures, with similar blood loss, number of blood transfusions and hospital stay.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicinski Glasnik\",\"volume\":\"20 2\",\"pages\":\"249-254\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicinski Glasnik\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17392/1616-23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicinski Glasnik","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17392/1616-23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的动态髋螺钉(DHS)和股骨近端防旋钉(PFNA)是治疗股骨粗隆骨折最常用的两种植入物。本研究的目的是评估DHS或PFNA治疗股骨粗隆骨折患者的失血量。方法对61例股骨粗隆骨折患者进行回顾性比较研究,根据手术方式分为DHS组和PFNA组。在PFNA组,使用短的第三代γ -钉进行骨固定(Supernail GT, Lima Corporate, Italy),在DHS组使用动态髋螺钉(Synthes, Oberdorf, Switzerland)。术前和术后第一天采集全血细胞计数、血红蛋白和红细胞压积值,并评估红细胞输注(RBC)。使用2022年的电子病历收集患者数据。结果两组患者的性别、年龄差异无统计学意义(p=0.510、p=0.087),骨折类型分布差异无统计学意义(p=0.886)。两组患者术后住院时间相似(p=0.643)。两组患者输血次数与固定方式、术后血红蛋白和红细胞压积水平无统计学意义(p=0.091),两组患者术后血红蛋白和红细胞压积水平无统计学意义(p=0.180和p=0.225)。结论DHS与PFNA假体治疗粗隆骨折是安全的手术技术,其出血量、输血次数和住院时间相似。
The effects of two fixation methods on blood loss in patients with trochanteric fracture: dynamic hip screw vs. proximal femoral nail anti-rotation.
Aim The two most commonly used implants for treatment of trochanteric fractures are the dynamic hip screw (DHS) and proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA). The aim of this study was to evaluate blood loss in patients with trochanteric fracture treated with DHS or PFNA. Methods This retrospective comparative study included 61 patients with trochanteric fracture, who were divided according to a surgical method into DHS and PFNA groups. In the PFNA group, a short third generation gamma-nail was used for osteosynthesis (Supernail GT, Lima Corporate, Italy), and in the DHS group a dynamic hip screw was used (Synthes, Oberdorf, Switzerland). Complete blood count with haemoglobin and haematocrit values was taken preoperatively and on the first day postoperatively and a number of red blood cell transfusions (RBC) were evaluated. Electronic medical records from 2022 were used to collect patient data. Results There were no significant differences in terms of gender and age between the groups (p=0.510 and p=0.087, respectively), as well as in the fracture type distribution (p=0.886). The duration of postoperative hospitalisation was similar between the groups (p=0.643). There was no statistically significant association between the number of RBC transfusions and fixation method (p=0.091), as well as in postoperative haemoglobin and haematocrit levels between the groups (p=0.180 and p=0.225, respectively). Conclusion Both DHS and PFNA implants are safe surgical techniques for the treatment of trochanteric fractures, with similar blood loss, number of blood transfusions and hospital stay.
期刊介绍:
Medicinski Glasnik (MG) is the official publication (two times per year) of the Medical Association of Zenica-Doboj Canton. Manuscripts that present of original basic and applied research from all fields of medicine (general and clinical practice, and basic medical sciences) are invited.