Literature DB >> 34509352

A rare complication of pelvic perforation by an excessive medial slide of the helical blade after treatment of an intertrochanteric fracture with proximal femoral nail anti-rotation: A case report and literature review.

Xiao-Kun Chen1, Jian Xiong1, Yi-Jun Liu1, Quan Han1, Tian-Bing Wang2, Dian-Ying Zhang3.   

Abstract

Intertrochanteric fractures have become a severe public health problem in elderly patients. Proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) is a commonly used intramedullary fixation device for unstable intertrochanteric fractures. Pelvic perforation by cephalic screw is a rare complication. We reported an 84-year-old female who fell at home and sustained an intertrochanteric fracture. The patient underwent surgery with PFNA as the intramedullary fixation device. Routine postoperative examination revealed medial migration of the helical blade that eventually caused pelvic perforation. We performed a cemented total hip arthroplasty as the savage procedure. At the latest follow-up of 12 months after total hip arthroplasty, the patient had no pain or loosening of the prosthesis in the left hip. Pelvic perforation should be considered when choosing PFNA as the intramedullary fixation device, especially in patients with severe osteoporosis wherein the helical blade can be easily inserted during the operation. The lack of devices to avoid oversliding of the helical blade in PFNA is an unreported cause of this complication and should be considered in such cases.
Copyright © 2021. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Case report; Complication; Hip fractures; Intertrochanteric fractures; Pelvic perforation; Proximal femoral nail anti-rotation

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34509352      PMCID: PMC9039463          DOI: 10.1016/j.cjtee.2021.08.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chin J Traumatol        ISSN: 1008-1275


Introduction

With the proceeding of aging society, the incidence of hip fractures is increasing, and the mortality rate in elderly patients raised by approximately 30% following hip fractures.1, 2, 3, 4 Intertrochanteric fractures of the femur were usually treated with surgical fixation using extramedullary fixation devices (e.g., dynamic hip screw). However, after the launch of third-generation intramedullary nails, e.g., proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA), an increasing number of orthopedists prefer them for their superior biological and mechanical advantages.5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 PFNA is a commonly used intramedullary fixation device for unstable intertrochanteric fractures, as it has a helical neck blade that provides rotational and angular stability. A few studies have reported the local complications of PFNA, including sliding of the cephalic screw, varus collapse, cut-out, and cut-through.11, 12, 13 Herein, we report a very uncommon complication in which the excessive medial slide of the helical blade perforated the pelvis following the treatment of an unstable intertrochanteric fracture with PFNA.

Case report

An 84-year-old female presented with severe left hip pain at another hospital after a falling accident at home. Plain radiography demonstrated an unstable intertrochanteric fracture (AO/OTA classification 31-A2.2) of the left femur, and the Singh index was grade 3 (Fig. 1A). The patient underwent emergency surgery with closed reduction and intramedullary nail fixation under spinal anesthesia. PFNA with a (170 × 9)-mm nail and 100-mm helical blade was placed without difficulty. The helical blade was positioned centrally in the femoral head; the tip-apex distance was 21 mm, and the neck-shaft angle was 135° on postoperative anteroposterior and lateral radiographs (Fig. 1B). The surgical procedure and postoperative recovery were uneventful, and the patient was discharged to a rehabilitation institution on postoperative day 7, where she was mobilized under partial weight-bearing with a walker.
Fig. 1

(A) Initial X-ray showing an intertrochanteric fracture of the left hip (AO/OTA classification 31-A2.2); (B) Post-operative anteroposterior and lateral X-rays of the fracture treated with proximal femoral nail anti-rotation; (C) Anteroposterior X-ray at 4 weeks after surgery showing medial migration of the helical blade; (D) Anteroposterior X-ray at 8 weeks after surgery showing perforation of the helical blade into the acetabulum.

(A) Initial X-ray showing an intertrochanteric fracture of the left hip (AO/OTA classification 31-A2.2); (B) Post-operative anteroposterior and lateral X-rays of the fracture treated with proximal femoral nail anti-rotation; (C) Anteroposterior X-ray at 4 weeks after surgery showing medial migration of the helical blade; (D) Anteroposterior X-ray at 8 weeks after surgery showing perforation of the helical blade into the acetabulum. Routine plain radiography after 4 weeks showed a slight medial migration of the helical blade (Fig. 1C) without fracture displacement. We decided to wait, observe, and keep the patient bedridden because the patient was totally pain-free. However, 8 weeks after the surgery, the patient experienced sudden pain in the left hip on turning over in bed. A repeat radiograph (Fig. 1D) showed an obvious medial slide and perforation of the helical blade through the femoral head and acetabulum and the presence of slight varus collapse of the femoral head. CT showed that the tip of the helical blade was in the pelvis and the fracture was nonunion (Fig. 2A–D).
Fig. 2

(A–D) CT scan at 8 weeks after surgery showing the tip of helical blade in the pelvic and non-union fracture; (A–C) Three consecutive CT figures; (D) 3-D reconstruction of the acetabulum; (E) Anteroposterior X-rays of a cemented total hip arthroplasty after removal of the proximal femoral nail anti-rotation.

(A–D) CT scan at 8 weeks after surgery showing the tip of helical blade in the pelvic and non-union fracture; (A–C) Three consecutive CT figures; (D) 3-D reconstruction of the acetabulum; (E) Anteroposterior X-rays of a cemented total hip arthroplasty after removal of the proximal femoral nail anti-rotation. We removed the PFNA and performed a cemented total hip arthroplasty under spinal anesthesia (Fig. 2E). At the latest follow-up of 12 months after total hip arthroplasty, the patient had no pain or loosening of the prosthesis in her left hip.

Discussion

Intertrochanteric fracture is one of the most serious health hazards in elderly individuals, and the best treatment remains controversial. At present, it is generally accepted that intramedullary nails should be used to treat unstable intertrochanteric fractures. However, the rate of complication has been reported to reach a maximum of 20.5% for the earlier intramedullary implants. PFNA is the improved third-generation intramedullary nail, in which the helical blade is designed to cause bone compaction around the implant during insertion and demonstrate a greater resistance to provide additional rotational stability. However, the resistance to axial migration has been found to be lower with helical blades than with conventional screws. The medial slide of the helical blade into the pelvis after surgical treatment of an intertrochanteric fracture with PFNA is a rare complication. A review of literature revealed two articles, by Takigami et al. and Gomes et al. regarding this complication; however, none of them described any specific cause of the complication. We also retrieved five reports regarding a similar complication in which the femoral head was perforated but the acetabulum was intact. Nayak et al. considered the loosening of the locking mechanism with a medial migration of the blade as a cause of the femoral head perforation. Brunner et al. and Simmermacher et al. attributed femoral head perforation to recent trauma. Brunner et al. conducted a retrospective analysis on 4109 patients who underwent nailing of trochanteric fractures using PFNA or trochanter fixation nail and observed that 0.6% of the patients had the complication of medial migration of the blade, which was termed as “cut-through.” They found that most of the patients with “cut-through” complication had helical blade exchanges during the operation. Chapman et al. attributed this complication to the fact that the helical blade has a sharp leading edge compared with the screw. Although perforation may occur after recent trauma in a few cases, this was not the reason for our case. In our case, we found that the helical blade had migrated medially and pelvic perforation was caused by varus collapse of the femoral head and the excessive medial slide of the helical blade. We found that in most of the reported cases with such complications, helical blades were used and they had varus collapse or helical blade slide (Table 1). Some theories on varus collapse include the lack of calcar support and poor bone quality. However, there are few studies and cases on helical blade slide. We speculate that the helical blade slide was due to PFNA that lacks device to avoid oversliding of the helical blade. We compared two commonly used intramedullary nail products---Zimmer natural nail (ZNN) and intertrochanteric antegrade nail (INTERTAN) available in the market with PFNA and found that both ZNN and INTERTAN had a small screw inside to prevent the slide of the cephalic screw, while PFNA had none (Fig. 3A). Once the helical blade loosens, a slide may occur. However, PFNA design has its unique advantages with regard to allowing the fracture to gradually slide and compress after postoperative weight-bearing. Some studies have shown that there is no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between INTERTAN and ZNN compared with PFNA, but the complications in this case have not been described.,, Zhang et al. designed a new type of femoral intramedullary nail system (Fig. 3B), which retains the advantages of sliding compression while avoiding the complications of extreme neck screw sliding such as in PFNA. We also found that most of the cases, including ours, were mobilized with early weight-bearing. The selection of a helical blade that is too long may also be a cause of such complication.
Table 1

Patient profiles in some reported cases of medial migration of the cephalic screw.

First authorAge/SexPelvic/Femoral head perforationOTA/AO classificationCephalic screw/length (mm)Tip-apex distance (mm)Neck-shaft angle (degrees)Time to weight bearing (days)Time to failure (weeks)Vurus collapseCephalic screw slidingTreatment
Gomes1788/FYes/Yes31-A1Helical blade/1002413618SlightObviousRemove the nail
Takigami1679/FYes/Yes31-A2Helical blade/unknow15.8Unknow112ObviousObviousTHA
Simmermacher876/FNo/Yes31-A2Helical blade/unknowUnknowUnknowUnknow6ObviousNoUnknow
Nayak1865/MNo/Yes31-A2Helical blade/9520128112NoSlightRemove the nail
Brunner19Case 189/FNo/Yes31-A2Helical blade/10514.6312976SlightNoChange a short blade
Brunner19 Case 288/FNo/Yes31-A2Helical blade/10519.3213196ObviousNoChange a short blade
Brunner19Case 367/FNo/Yes31-A2Helical blade/100Unknow14016SlightObviousTHA
Present case84/FYes/Yes31-A2Helical blade/952113578SlightObviousTHA

THA: total hip arthroplasty.

Fig. 3

Intramedullary nail products. (A) Three commonly used intramedullary fixation devices. Left: proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA, Synthes); Middle: Zimmer natural nail (ZNN, Zimmer); Right: intertrochanteric antegrade nail (INTERTAN, Smith & Nephew). The small screws pointed by the arrows are used to lock the nail and the cephalic screw together. (B) A new type of femoral intramedullary nail system designed by Zhang et al..

Patient profiles in some reported cases of medial migration of the cephalic screw. THA: total hip arthroplasty. Intramedullary nail products. (A) Three commonly used intramedullary fixation devices. Left: proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA, Synthes); Middle: Zimmer natural nail (ZNN, Zimmer); Right: intertrochanteric antegrade nail (INTERTAN, Smith & Nephew). The small screws pointed by the arrows are used to lock the nail and the cephalic screw together. (B) A new type of femoral intramedullary nail system designed by Zhang et al.. In terms of treatment, in a few reported cases the intramedullary nails were removed or changed to a shorter helical blade. Brunner et al. recommended total hip arthroplasty as the valid treatment for such complication. In the present case, considering that the implant failure of reoperation was highly possible, the fracture may still be nonunion, and there was a risk of femoral head punching into the perforated acetabulum after weight-bearing, we chose total hip arthroplasty as the savage procedure. In summary, we report a rare case of the complication of pelvic perforation by a helical blade after treatment of an intertrochanteric fracture with PFNA. This complication should be considered when choosing PFNA for intramedullary nailing, especially in patients with severe osteoporosis wherein the helical blade can be easily inserted during operation. The lack of devices to lock the nail and helical blade in PFNA is an unreported cause of the complication and should be considered in such cases.

Funding

, 2018YFF0301103. The funding body will support the publication fees without affecting the diagnosis and treatment of the patient and the writing of the manuscript.

Ethical statement

This case has been reported in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. A written informed consent to publish this report was obtained from the patient.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare no competing interest.
  23 in total

1.  Clinical comparison of the second and third generation of intramedullary devices for trochanteric fractures of the hip--Blade vs screw.

Authors:  Andreas Lenich; Helen Vester; Michael Nerlich; Edgar Mayr; Ulrich Stöckle; Bernd Füchtmeier
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2010-08-21       Impact factor: 2.586

2.  Acetabular perforation after medial migration of the helical blade through the femoral head after treatment of an unstable trochanteric fracture with proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA): a case report.

Authors:  Iori Takigami; Kazuichiro Ohnishi; Yoshiki Ito; Akihito Nagano; Hisashi Sumida; Kaori Tanaka; Katsuji Shimizu
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.512

3.  Burden of hip fracture using disability-adjusted life-years: a pooled analysis of prospective cohorts in the CHANCES consortium.

Authors:  Nikos Papadimitriou; Konstantinos K Tsilidis; Philippos Orfanos; Vassiliki Benetou; Evangelia E Ntzani; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Annemarie Künn-Nelen; Ulrika Pettersson-Kymmer; Sture Eriksson; Hermann Brenner; Ben Schöttker; Kai-Uwe Saum; Bernd Holleczek; Francine D Grodstein; Diane Feskanich; Nicola Orsini; Alicja Wolk; Andrea Bellavia; Tom Wilsgaard; Lone Jørgensen; Paolo Boffetta; Dimitrios Trichopoulos; Antonia Trichopoulou
Journal:  Lancet Public Health       Date:  2017-04-11

4.  Hip screw migration testing: first results for hip screws and helical blades utilizing a new oscillating test method.

Authors:  Christopher T Born; Bernhard Karich; Christoph Bauer; Geert von Oldenburg; Peter Augat
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2010-09-09       Impact factor: 3.494

5.  Predictive factors for cutting-out in femoral intramedullary nailing.

Authors:  Antonio Lobo-Escolar; Eduardo Joven; Daniel Iglesias; Antonio Herrera
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2010-09-15       Impact factor: 2.586

6.  The PFNA proximal femur nail in treatment of unstable proximal femur fractures--3 cases of postoperative perforation of the helical blade into the hip joint.

Authors:  Alexander Brunner; Jens Arne Jöckel; Reto Babst
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2008 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.512

Review 7.  A systematic review of hip fracture incidence and probability of fracture worldwide.

Authors:  J A Kanis; A Odén; E V McCloskey; H Johansson; D A Wahl; C Cooper
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 8.  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

9.  An unusual case of femoral head perforation following fixation with proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA-II) for an unstable intertrochanteric fracture: Case report and literature review.

Authors:  Mayur Nayak; Rahul Yadav; V Ganesh; Vijay Digge
Journal:  Trauma Case Rep       Date:  2019-02-11

10.  Pelvic migration of the helical blade after treatment of transtrochanteric fracture using a proximal femoral nail.

Authors:  Pedro Luciano Teixeira Gomes; Luís Sá Castelo; António Lemos Lopes; Marta Maio; Adélia Miranda; António Marques Dias
Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop       Date:  2016-07-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.