DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20205559

A comparative study on the functional outcome of intertrochanteric fractures treated by proximal femoral nailing or dynamic hip screw fixation

Gineshmon Chandy, Saju S.

Abstract


Background: Intertrochanteric fractures are one of the commonly occurring injuries in elderly patients and are high among females and those with osteoporosis. They were treated with either dynamic hip screw (DHS) fixation or proximal femoral nailing (PFNA2) here at our institution. The study was conducted in order to find which method of surgical fixation has better functional outcome.  

Methods: Total 96 patients of intertrochanteric fractures admitted during the study period of November 2017 to April 2019 were included for the study. These patients were randomly divided into two groups; DHS was used as implant in group1 and PFNA2 in group 2. Postoperatively patients were followed up after 1 month, 3months and 6 months of the surgery and were assessed using Harris hip score.

Results: Harris hip score was higher with PFNA2 group compared to DHS group in all follow-ups. In unstable fractures DHS group had poor outcome compared to PFNA2. Radiological union occurred in 27.1 % cases by 3 months and 72.9% cases by 6 months with DHS whereas 70.8% and 97.9% respectively with PFNA2.  

Conclusions: PFNA2 gives a better functional outcome when compared to DHS. Even though DHS gives good functional outcome in stable fractures it is not so in the case of unstable fractures. The radiological union also is faster with proximal femoral nailing. Hence in our opinion PFNA2 can be the better fixation device compared to DHS especially in unstable fractures.  


Keywords


Intertrochanteric fracture, Dynamic hip screw, proximal femoral nail anti-rotation

Full Text:

PDF

References


Rathod J, Tijoriwala P. A study of results of fixation of pertrochanteric femur fractures with dynamic hip screw (DHS) & comparision with past studies. Int J Orthopaed Sci. 2019;5(3):141-7.

Hinton RY, Smith GS. The association of age, race, and sex with the location of proximal femoral fractures in the elderly. J Bone Joint Surg. 1993;75(5):752-9.

Jiang HX, Majumdar SR, Dick DA, Moreau M, Raso J, Otto DD, et al. Development and initial validation of a risk score for predicting in‐hospital and 1‐year mortality in patients with hip fractures. J Bone Min Res. 2005;20(3):494-500.

Ngobeni RS. Mortality in elderly patients with intertrochanteric fractures: three years' experience. SA Orthop J. 2010;9(1):55-60.

Choudhari P, Chhabra S, Kiyawat V. Evaluation of results of titanium elastic nailing system in paediatric lower extremity fractures of long bones. J Evol Medic Dent Sci. 2014;3(72):15303-10.

David A, Von Der heyde D, Pommer A. Therapeutic possibilities in trochanteric fractures. Orthopaedics. 2000;29(4):294-30

Jonnes C, Sm S, Najimudeen S. Type II Intertrochanteric Fractures: Proximal Femoral Nailing (PFN) Versus Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS). Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2016;4(1):23-8.

CK Yong, CN Tan, R Penafort, DA Singh, MV Varaprasad; Dynamic Hip Screw Compared to Condylar Blade Plate in the Treatment of Unstable Fragility Intertrochanteric Fractures. Mal Orthopaed J. 2009;3(1).

Kumar N, Kataria H, Yadav C, Gadagoli BS, Raj R. Evaluation of proximal femoral locking plate in unstable extracapsular proximal femoral fractures: Surgical technique & mid term follow up results. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2014;5(3):137-45.

Sharma V, Babhulkar S, Babhulkar S. Role of gamma nail in management of pertrochanteric fractures of femur. Ind J Orthop. 2008;42(2):212-6.

Hohendorff B, Meyer P, Menezes D, Meier L, Elke R. Treatment results and complications after PFN osteosynthesis. Der Unfallchirurg. 2005;108(11):938-40.

Socci AR, Casemyr NE, Leslie MP, Baumgaertner MR. Implant options for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures of the hip: rationale, evidence, and recommendations. Bone Joint J. 2017;99-B(1):128-33.

Raviraj A, Anand A, Chakravarthy M, Pai S. Proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) for treatment of osteoporotic proximal femoral fractures. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2012;22:301-5.

Santharam B, Mohammed KF, Ratnam S, Madhav A. A comparative study of intertrochanteric fractures of hip treated with PFN & PFNA 2.

Kyavater BS, Gupta S. Comparative study between dynamic hip screw vs Proximal femoral nailing in unstable inter-trochanteric fractures of the Femur in adults. J Evol Medic Dent Sci. 2015;4(50):8690-4.

Boyd HB. GRIFFIN "classification and treatment of trochanteric fractures". Arch Surg. 1949;58:853-66.

Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by moldarthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51(4):737-55

Kumar R, Singh RN, Singh BN. Comparative prospective study of proximal femoral nail and dynamic hip screw in treatment of intertrochanteric fracture femur. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2012;3(1):28-36.

Karanam V, Kumar UA, Dr, Teja S, Teja CB. PFn v/s DHs in stabilization of interochanteric fractures: A Comparative study. Int J Orthopaed Sci. 2019; 5(2):750-4.

Bhakat U, Bandyopadhayay R. Comparitive Study between Proximal Femoral Nailing and Dynamic Hip Screw in Intertrochanteric Fracture of Femur. Open J Orthop. 2013; 03(07):291-5.

Faisal, Mohammad, Nistane, Prithviraj. Proximal Femoral Nailing vs. Dynamic Hip Screw in unstable Intertrochanteric Fracture of Femur–a comparative analysis. Int J Biomedic Advan Res. 2016.