Literature DB >> 15088148

Pitfalls and complications in the use of the proximal femoral nail.

Joachim Windolf1, Dirk A Hollander, Mohssen Hakimi, Wolfgang Linhart.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Osteosynthesis with the proximal femoral nail (PFN) features the advantages of high rotational stability of the head-neck fragment, an unreamed implantation technique and the possibility of static or dynamic distal locking. However, the use of the nail is technically ambitious and is accompanied by some risks of error, which can lead to failure of the osteosynthesis. In this paper we present the results of a critical analysis of mistakes that were made in our hospital during the introduction period of this implant. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We carried out a prospective analysis of the data of 121 consecutive patients who were suffering from trochanteric or subtrochanteric fracture between December 1997 and December 2000 and who had been treated with a PFN.
RESULTS: We identified intraoperative technical difficulties in 23 patients (19.1%). Seven cases showed postoperative local complications that required operative revision on six patients (4.9%). The main reasons for the failure of the operations involved were poor reduction and wrong choice of screws. Following our critical analysis, we were able to avoid those problems.
CONCLUSIONS: When 31A fractures are to be stabilised with a PFN, the precise technical performance of the implantation represents the basic surgical requirement. Already present minor deviations will subsequently cause loosening of the implants and failure of the operation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15088148     DOI: 10.1007/s00423-004-0466-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg        ISSN: 1435-2443            Impact factor:   3.445


  16 in total

1.  [Intra- and perioperative complications in the stabilization of per- and subtrochanteric femoral fractures by means of PFN].

Authors:  W Werner-Tutschku; G Lajtai; G Schmiedhuber; T Lang; C Pirkl; E Orthner
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 1.000

2.  A comparison of mechanical strength of the femoral neck following locked intramedullary nailing using oblique versus transverse proximal screws.

Authors:  A J Aboulafia; M M Price; R E Kennon; W C Hutton
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  1999 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.512

3.  [Osteosynthesis of trochanteric fractures using proximal femoral nails].

Authors:  P Dousa; J Bartonícek; D Jehlicka; J Skála-Rosenbaum
Journal:  Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 0.531

4.  The AO/ASIF proximal femoral nail (PFN) for the treatment of unstable trochanteric femoral fracture.

Authors:  G Al-yassari; R J Langstaff; J W M Jones; M Al-Lami
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.586

5.  The treatment of unstable, extracapsular hip fractures with the AO/ASIF proximal femoral nail (PFN)--our first 60 cases.

Authors:  H Banan; A Al-Sabti; T Jimulia; A J Hart
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.586

6.  [Stabilisation of unstable trochanteric femoral fractures. Dynamic hip screw (DHS) with trochanteric stabilisation plate vs. proximal femur nail (PFN)].

Authors:  S Nuber; T Schönweiss; A Rüter
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 1.000

7.  Dynamic hip screw with trochanteric stabilizing plate in the treatment of unstable proximal femoral fractures: a comparative study with the Gamma nail and compression hip screw.

Authors:  J E Madsen; L Naess; A K Aune; A Alho; A Ekeland; K Strømsøe
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 2.512

Review 8.  [Pertrochanteric fractures].

Authors:  K M Stürmer; K Dresing
Journal:  Zentralbl Chir       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 0.942

9.  The proximal femoral nail (PFN)--a minimal invasive treatment of unstable proximal femoral fractures: a prospective study of 55 patients with a follow-up of 15 months.

Authors:  Christian Boldin; Franz J Seibert; Florian Fankhauser; Gerolf Peicha; Wolfgang Grechenig; Rudolf Szyszkowitz
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  2003-02

10.  A randomized study of the compression hip screw and Gamma nail in 426 fractures.

Authors:  Leif Ahrengart; Hans Törnkvist; Per Fornander; Karl-Göran Thorngren; Lauri Pasanen; Per Wahlström; Seppo Honkonen; Urban Lindgren
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  15 in total

1.  Proximal femoral nail - an analysis of 100 cases of proximal femoral fractures with an average follow up of 1 year.

Authors:  W M Gadegone; Y S Salphale
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-06-21       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  A rare complication after intertrochanteric fracture treated with proximal femoral nail: femoral neck insufficiency fracture.

Authors:  Cemil Kayali; Taskin Altay; Zafer Kement; Serhan Yagdi; Semmi Koyuncu
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2013-01-24

3.  [Treatment results of pertrochanteric and subtrochanteric femoral fractures: a retrospective comparison of PFN and PFNA].

Authors:  J Penzkofer; T Mendel; C Bauer; K Brehme
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.000

4.  Using three-dimensional computational modeling to compare the geometrical fitness of two kinds of proximal femoral intramedullary nail for Chinese femur.

Authors:  Sheng Zhang; Kairui Zhang; Yimin Wang; Wei Feng; Bowei Wang; Bin Yu
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2013-02-05

5.  Long proximal femoral nail in ipsilateral fractures proximal femur and shaft of femur.

Authors:  Wm Gadegone; Vijayanand Lokhande; Yogesh Salphale; Alankar Ramteke
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 1.251

6.  Outcomes of Geriatric Hip Fractures Treated with AFFIXUS Hip Fracture Nail.

Authors:  Ahmed Mabrouk; Mysore Madhusudan; Mohammed Waseem; Steven Kershaw; Jochen Fischer
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2014-12-18

7.  Implantation of INTERTAN™ nail in four patients with intertrochanteric fractures leading to single or comminute fractures: pitfalls and recommendations: a case series.

Authors:  Yong Jiang; Jie Li; Hassan H Dib; Yuan-Cheng Li
Journal:  J Med Case Rep       Date:  2014-11-23

8.  Mechanical failures after fixation with proximal femoral nail and risk factors.

Authors:  Şemmi Koyuncu; Taşkın Altay; Cemil Kayalı; Fırat Ozan; Kamil Yamak
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 4.458

9.  The Analysis of Biomechanical Properties of Proximal Femur after Implant Removal.

Authors:  Jae Hyuk Yang; Tae Gon Jung; Arjun Rupanagudi Honnurappa; Jae Min Cha; Chang Hwa Ham; Tae Yoon Kim; Seung Woo Suh
Journal:  Appl Bionics Biomech       Date:  2016-08-11       Impact factor: 1.781

10.  Should the tip-apex distance (TAD) rule be modified for the proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA)? A retrospective study.

Authors:  Andrej N Nikoloski; Anthony L Osbrough; Piers J Yates
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2013-10-17       Impact factor: 2.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.