Literature DB >> 26054619

Extra- vs. intramedullary treatment of pertrochanteric fractures: a biomechanical in vitro study comparing dynamic hip screw and intramedullary nail.

Lukas Weiser1, Andreas A Ruppel, Jakob V Nüchtern, Kay Sellenschloh, Johannes Zeichen, Klaus Püschel, Michael M Morlock, Wolfgang Lehmann.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Due to the demographic trend, pertrochanteric fractures of the femur will gain increasing importance in the future. Both extra- and intramedullary implants are used with good results in the treatment of these fractures. New, angular stable extramedullary implants promise increased postoperative stability even with unstable fractures. Additional trochanteric plates are intended to prevent secondary impaction, varisation and shortening of the fracture, as well as medialisation of the femoral shaft. The aim of this study was to perform a biomechanical comparison of both procedures regarding their postoperative stability and failure mechanisms.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve fresh-frozen human femurs were randomized into two groups based on the volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD). Standardized pertrochanteric fractures (AO31-A2.3) were generated and treated either with an angular stable dynamic hip screw (DHS) or an intramedullary nail (nail). Correct implant position and the tip-apex distance (TAD) were controlled postoperatively using X-ray. Specimens were mounted in a servohydraulic testing machine and an axial loading was applied according to a single-leg stance model. Both groups were biomechanically compared with regard to native and postoperative stiffness, survival during cyclic testing, load to failure, and failure mechanisms.
RESULTS: TAD, vBMD, and native stiffness were similar for both groups. The stiffness decreased significantly from native to postoperative state in all specimens (p < 0.001). The postoperative stiffness of both groups varied non-significantly (p = 0.275). The failure loads for specimens treated with the nail were significantly higher than for those treated with the DHS (8480.8 ± 1238.9 N vs. 2778.2 ± 196.8 N; p = 0.008).
CONCLUSIONS: Extra- and intramedullary osteosynthesis showed comparable results as regards postoperative stiffness and survival during cyclic testing. Since the failure load of the nail was significantly higher in the tested AO31-A2.3 fracture model, we conclude that intramedullary implants should be preferred in these, unstable, fractures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26054619     DOI: 10.1007/s00402-015-2252-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg        ISSN: 0936-8051            Impact factor:   3.067


  18 in total

1.  The incidence of life threatening iatrogenic vessel injury following closed or open reduction and internal fixation of intertrochanteric femoral factures.

Authors:  David Segal; Eyal Yaacobi; Niv Marom; Victor Feldman; Elhan Aliev; Ezequiel Palmanovich; Gabriel Bartal; Yaron S Brin
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 2.  Intertrochanteric fractures: a review of fixation methods.

Authors:  Senthil Nathan Sambandam; Jayadev Chandrasekharan; Varatharaj Mounasamy; Cyril Mauffrey
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2016-03-30

3.  [Proximal femoral nails antirotation and dynamic hip screws for fixation of unstable intertrochanteric fractures of femur: A meta-analysis].

Authors:  Y R Zhang; F Rao; W Pi; P X Zhang; B G Jiang
Journal:  Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban       Date:  2019-06-18

4.  What is the most fixable intramedullary implant for basicervical fracture and transcervical shear fracture? - A finite element study.

Authors:  Motoharu Komatsu; Takehiro Iwami; Hiroaki Kijima; Tetsuya Kawano; Naohisa Miyakoshi
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2022-09-20

Review 5.  Conversion Total Hip Arthroplasty After Failed Basicervical Hip Fracture Fixation: A Case Report and Review of Literature.

Authors:  Vineet Tyagi; Oluwaseun Akinbo
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2017

6.  [Trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures].

Authors:  C Bahrs; A Schreiner; U Stöckle; T Klopfer; P Hemmann
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 0.955

7.  Comparison of intramedullary and extramedullary fixation of stable intertrochanteric fractures in the elderly: a prospective randomised controlled trial exploring hidden perioperative blood loss.

Authors:  Leyi Cai; Te Wang; Lu Di; Wei Hu; Jianshun Wang
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  Treatment With Helical Blade Cephalomedullary Nail for Two-Part Basicervical Proximal Femoral Fracture in Elderly Patients: A Retrospective Observational Study.

Authors:  Ichiro Okano; Takatoshi Sawada; Nobumasa Kushima; Tetsuya Tachibana; Katsunori Inagaki
Journal:  Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil       Date:  2017-11-28

9.  Metabolic Shock in Elderly Pertrochanteric or Intertrochanteric Surgery. Comparison of Three Surgical Methods. Is there a Much Safer?

Authors:  Gómez-Garrido David; Bisaccia Michele; Ripani Umberto; Florin Cioancă; Schiavone Andrea; Ciotta Alfonso; Ibañéz-Vicente Cristina; Medina-Lorca Maria; Herrera-Molepecers Juan Antonio; Rollo Giuseppe; Meccariello Luigi
Journal:  Rom J Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  2020-12-31

10.  Load distribution between cephalic screws in a dual lag screw trochanteric nail.

Authors:  Julia Henschel; Sebastian Eberle; Peter Augat
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2016-04-01       Impact factor: 2.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.