Sung Soo Kim1, Hyeon Jun Kim2, Chan Soo Lee1. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Dong-A University, Dongdaesin-Dong 3-ga, Busan 602-715, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Dong-A University, Dongdaesin-Dong 3-ga, Busan 602-715, Republic of Korea. Electronic address: hyeonjun@dau.ac.kr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study intended to explore the clinical outcomes of PFNA-II, one of the commonly used fixation devices for intertrochanteric fractures and the association of clinical results with the extent of proximal nail protrusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 315 cases that underwent internal fixation using PFNA-II between September 2010 and June 2018 among intertrochanteric fracture patients aged over 65 years, a total of 86 patients with an ability to communicate clearly and a minimum follow-up of 6 months were retrospectively reviewed. We classified the subjects according to PFNA-II protrusion over the greater trochanter area on anteroposterior radiographs. Differences between the two groups were examined by comparing demographic characteristics including gender, age, height, weight and BMI, instrumental characteristics including PFNA nail size, nail diameter, blade length and blade position, radiologic characteristics including reduction quality, Dorr type and bone union, and clinical characteristics including GT pain,VAS score and Harris Hip Score (HHS). RESULTS: A total of 86 cases were divided into 30 (34.9%) in the protrusion group (group A) and 56 (65.1%) in the non-protrusion group (group B). No significant difference was found in demographic characteristics such as gender, age, height, weight and BMI between the two groups. Two groups had no statistically significant difference in PFNA nail length, nail diameter and blade length, but showed a statistically significant difference in blade position. At the latest follow-up, the mean HHS shows no statistically significant difference between the two groups. On the contrary, the number of patients complaining of GT pain and VAS score were statistically significantly higher in group A. Removal of metal implants was performed in two patients in the protrusion group due to a complaint of persistent GT pain. CONCLUSION: Nail protrusion over the greater trochanter area occurs frequently after the surgical treatment of intertrochanteric fracture using PFNA-II. When the nail protruded into the greater trochanter, the number of patients who clinically complained of pain was statistically significantly high. We recommend a modification to the PFNA-II that would further shorten the proximal nail end suitable for the Asian population to achieve better clinical results in the fixation of intertrochanteric fractures.
PURPOSE: This study intended to explore the clinical outcomes of PFNA-II, one of the commonly used fixation devices for intertrochanteric fractures and the association of clinical results with the extent of proximal nail protrusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 315 cases that underwent internal fixation using PFNA-II between September 2010 and June 2018 among intertrochanteric fracturepatients aged over 65 years, a total of 86 patients with an ability to communicate clearly and a minimum follow-up of 6 months were retrospectively reviewed. We classified the subjects according to PFNA-II protrusion over the greater trochanter area on anteroposterior radiographs. Differences between the two groups were examined by comparing demographic characteristics including gender, age, height, weight and BMI, instrumental characteristics including PFNA nail size, nail diameter, blade length and blade position, radiologic characteristics including reduction quality, Dorr type and bone union, and clinical characteristics including GT pain,VAS score and Harris Hip Score (HHS). RESULTS: A total of 86 cases were divided into 30 (34.9%) in the protrusion group (group A) and 56 (65.1%) in the non-protrusion group (group B). No significant difference was found in demographic characteristics such as gender, age, height, weight and BMI between the two groups. Two groups had no statistically significant difference in PFNA nail length, nail diameter and blade length, but showed a statistically significant difference in blade position. At the latest follow-up, the mean HHS shows no statistically significant difference between the two groups. On the contrary, the number of patients complaining of GT pain and VAS score were statistically significantly higher in group A. Removal of metal implants was performed in two patients in the protrusion group due to a complaint of persistent GT pain. CONCLUSION: Nail protrusion over the greater trochanter area occurs frequently after the surgical treatment of intertrochanteric fracture using PFNA-II. When the nail protruded into the greater trochanter, the number of patients who clinically complained of pain was statistically significantly high. We recommend a modification to the PFNA-II that would further shorten the proximal nail end suitable for the Asian population to achieve better clinical results in the fixation of intertrochanteric fractures.