Literature DB >> 15849648

[Comparative study of the treatment of pertrochanteric fractures--trochanteric gamma nail vs. proximal femoral nail].

P Megas1, A Kaisidis, P Zouboulis, M Papas, A Panagopoulos, E Lambiris.   

Abstract

AIM: We have performed a retrospective comparative study between the trochanteric gamma nail (TGN) and the proximal femoral nail (PFN).
METHOD: During the period 1998-2003, 97 TGN and 83 PFN were used for the treatment of pertrochanteric fractures. Most of the fractures were of the A3 type according to the AO/ASIF classification. Clinical and radiological follow-ups were available for 87 TGN and 65 PFN.
RESULTS: The mean operative time for the TGN was shorter than that for the PFN. Intraoperative complications were noted in 17.5 % and 28.8 % for the TGN and PFN groups, respectively. Late complications occurred in 18.4 % for TGN compared to 27.6 % of the PFN. Union was achieved in 94.2 % and 89.3 % of the patients treated with the TGN and PFN, respectively. The reoperation rates were 10.3 % and 24.6 % for the TGN and the PFN, respectively. Clinical outcomes were good for both groups (65 % in the TGN, 62 % in the PFN group).
CONCLUSION: Treatment of pertrochanteric fractures using the TGN and PFN implants is quite reliable. The major complication was cut-out and occurred mostly in the PFN group, while varus deformity was more frequent in the TGN group. The PFN was associated with a higher rate of reoperation and longer operative time, probably due to a more demanding technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15849648     DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-836453

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb        ISSN: 0044-3220


  8 in total

1.  Failure of fixation of trochanteric femur fractures: Clinical recommendations for avoiding Z-effect and reverse Z-effect type complications.

Authors:  Robinson Esteves Santos Pires; Egídio Oliveira Santana; Leandro Emílio Nascimento Santos; Vincenzo Giordano; Daniel Balbachevsky; Fernando Baldy Dos Reis
Journal:  Patient Saf Surg       Date:  2011-06-22

2.  Use of a Trochanteric Fixation Nail-Advanced (TFNA) with cement augmentation for treatment of trochanteric fractures in patients greater than sixty five years of age.

Authors:  Marie Fernandez; Yoann David; Frédéric Dubrana; Rémi Di Francia
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2022-01-16       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  [Proximal femur fractures: results and complications after osteosynthesis with PFN and TGN].

Authors:  M Müller; A Seitz; L Besch; R E Hilgert; A Seekamp
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.000

4.  Intertrochanteric fractures: comparison between two different locking nails.

Authors:  Carmelo D'Arrigo; Alessandro Carcangiu; Dario Perugia; Simone Scapellato; Raffaella Alonzo; Silvia Frontini; Andrea Ferretti
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2012-10-28       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  [Surgical revision for complications after gamma3-nailing osteosynthesis of proximal humeral fractures : Follow-up series of 1500 patients].

Authors:  C Hirschfeld; J Jung; A Wicher; M Mousavi
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 1.000

6.  [Biaxial reconstruction nail for pertrochanteric femoral fractures. Osteosynthesis].

Authors:  S Weihrauch; G Gradl; M Beck; R Rotter; T Mittlmeier; P Gierer
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 1.000

7.  Augmentation of proximal femoral nail in unstable trochanteric fractures.

Authors:  Wasudeo M Gadegone; Bhaskaran Shivashankar; Vijayanad Lokhande; Yogesh Salphale
Journal:  SICOT J       Date:  2017-02-13

8.  Intramedullary nailing for pertrochanteric fractures of proximal femur: a consecutive series of 323 patients treated with two devices.

Authors:  Pompeo Catania; Daniele Passaretti; Giorgio Montemurro; Simone Ripanti; Stefano Carbone; Vittorio Candela; Michele Carnovale; Stefano Gumina; Francecsco Pallotta
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 2.359

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.