Literature DB >> 26197959

Do PFNA devices and Intertan nails both have the same effects in the treatment of trochanteric fractures? A prospective clinical study.

Mustafa Seyhan1, Ismail Turkmen2, Koray Unay3, Afsar Timucin Ozkut4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To clinically and radiologically compare third-generation intramedullary nails used in the treatment of trochanteric hip fractures and to determine their efficacy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-five of 88 patients admitted to our hospital with trochanteric fractures were enrolled in the study; 43 were treated with PFNA devices and 32 with Intertan nails. The amount of compression applied during the procedure, duration of the procedure, amount of subsequent shortening in the proximal femoral area, subsequent backup of proximal screws, and changes in the tip-apex and tip-cortex distances were compared between groups. The postoperative change in the varus angle of the proximal femur and times to mobilization, full weight bearing, and fracture union were also evaluated.
RESULTS: On early postoperative radiographs, the tip-apex distance was ≤25 mm in 86 % of patients in the PFNA group and 96.9 % of those in the Intertan group. Twelve months postoperatively, the tip-apex distance did not differ between groups. No cut-out of the screws into the coxofemoral joint was observed. Fracture healing was achieved in all patients. At 12 months postoperatively, the rates of proximal screw backup, proximal femoral shortening, and decrease in the varus angle of the proximal femur were significantly higher in the PFNA group than in the Intertan group.
CONCLUSIONS: Trochanteric fractures may be treated effectively with PFNA devices or Intertan nails. During the healing period, the rates of reverse displacement of the proximal screw, shortening of the proximal femur, and decrease in the varus angle of the proximal femur were significantly higher in the PFNA group than in the Intertan group. Surgical technique, implant positioning, and the choice of implant play roles in the successful treatment of trochanteric fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 1, prospective, prognostic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26197959     DOI: 10.1007/s00776-015-0750-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Sci        ISSN: 0949-2658            Impact factor:   1.601


  19 in total

Review 1.  Surgical interventions for treating extracapsular hip fractures in older adults: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sharon R Lewis; Richard Macey; Joseph Lewis; Jamie Stokes; James R Gill; Jonathan A Cook; William Gp Eardley; Martyn J Parker; Xavier L Griffin
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-02-10

2.  Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation Versus Reverse Less Invasive Stabilization System-distal Femur for Treating Proximal Femoral Fractures: A Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xuan Jiang; Ying Wang; XinLong Ma; JianXiong Ma; Chen Wang; ChengBao Zhang; Zhe Han; Lei Sun; Bin Lu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 1.889

3.  Proximal femoral nail antirotation versus dynamic hip screw fixation for treatment of osteoporotic type 31-A1 intertrochanteric femoral fractures in elderly patients.

Authors:  Xianshang Zeng; Nan Zhang; Dan Zeng; Lili Zhang; Ping Xu; Lei Cao; Weiguang Yu; Ke Zhan; Xinchao Zhang
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 1.671

4.  Learning Curve and Clinical Outcomes of Performing Surgery with the InterTan Intramedullary Nail in Treating Femoral Intertrochanteric Fractures.

Authors:  A-Bing Li; Wei-Jiang Zhang; Ji-Qi Wang; You-Ming Zhao; Wei-Jun Guo
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2017-04-19       Impact factor: 3.411

5.  Influence of different great trochanteric entry points on the outcome of intertrochanteric fractures: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Shuo Pan; Xiao-Hui Liu; Tao Feng; Hui-Jun Kang; Zhi-Guang Tian; Chun-Guang Lou
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2017-03-14       Impact factor: 2.362

6.  Optimizing stability in AO/OTA 31-A2 intertrochanteric fracture fixation in older patients with osteoporosis.

Authors:  Chi Zhang; Bo Xu; Guanzhao Liang; Xianshang Zeng; Dan Zeng; Deng Chen; Zhe Ge; Weiguang Yu; Xinchao Zhang
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2018-03-08       Impact factor: 1.671

7.  INTERTAN nail versus proximal femoral nail antirotation-Asia for intertrochanteric femur fractures in elderly patients with primary osteoporosis.

Authors:  Hui Zhang; Xianshang Zeng; Nan Zhang; Dan Zeng; Ping Xu; Lili Zhang; Deng Chen; Weiguang Yu; Xinchao Zhang
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2017-06-06       Impact factor: 1.671

8.  Comparison of clinical outcomes with InterTan vs Gamma nail or PFNA in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jian-Xiong Ma; Ming-Jie Kuang; Zheng-Rui Fan; Fei Xing; Yun-Long Zhao; Lu-Kai Zhang; Heng-Ting Chen; Chao Han; Xin-Long Ma
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-11-21       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 9.  Comparison of a twin interlocking derotation and compression screw cephalomedullary nail (InterTAN) with a single screw derotation cephalomedullary nail (proximal femoral nail antirotation): a systematic review and meta-analysis for intertrochanteric fractures.

Authors:  Leo Nherera; Paul Trueman; Alan Horner; Tracy Watson; Alan J Johnstone
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 2.359

10.  A retrospective analysis of the InterTan nail and proximal femoral nail anti-rotation in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients with osteoporosis: a minimum follow-up of 3 years.

Authors:  Hui Zhang; Xiaoxiao Zhu; Genwang Pei; Xianshang Zeng; Nan Zhang; Ping Xu; Deng Chen; Weiguang Yu; Xinchao Zhang
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2017-10-10       Impact factor: 2.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.