<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> <span lang="EN-GB">In the management of peri-trochanteric fractures, </span>intramedullary (IM) devices have proven advantage over <span lang="EN-GB">extramedullary devices. IM devices</span> allow for stable anatomical fixation of more comminuted fractures without shortening the abductor lever arm or changing the proximal femoral anatomy. Between IM devices like proximal femoral nail (PFN) and proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA), the helical blade of latter is believed to provide stability, compression and rotational control of the fracture with higher cut out strength. The following study was undertaken in an attempt to compare these two types of Intra-medullary devices<span lang="EN-IN">.</span></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> Between January 2012 and June 2013, 50 patients with unstable intertrochanteric fractures fulfilling inclusion and exclusion criteria, were randomized into 2 groups to undergo CRIF with either standard PFN (n=25) or PFNA (n=25). They were compared in terms of demography, per-operative variables and postoperative parameters including functional evaluation till 1year postoperatively.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Background demographic variables, fracture type and pre-injury ambulatory status were comparable between the groups. Operative duration of surgery, amount of blood loss and number of fluoroscopic images were significantly lower in PFNA group as compared to PFN group. Post op complications like infection, non-union, cut out/z-effect, loss of reduction, re-operation and mortality rates didn’t differ significantly between the groups. Post op functional recovery as evaluated by pain, use of walking aids and Harris hip scores were similar in both groups<span lang="EN-IN">. </span></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> PFNA significantly reduces the operative time, amount of blood loss and fluoroscopic imaging as compared to PFN. However PFNA offers no significant benefits over PFN in terms of post-operative functional recovery or complications<span lang="EN-IN">.</span></p>

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Bone patellar tendon bone <strong>(</strong>BPTB) and hamstring (HT) auto grafts have been used routinely in reconstruction of ACL over past two decades. Controversy still remains as to which graft is superior over other. Many studies have compared these graft options using different implants and different methods of fixation. Continuation of efforts in the same direction; purpose of the study is to compare these two graft options utilizing identical implants and similar method of fixation.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> 40 patients of clinically and radiologically diagnosed ACL tear fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria were randomized into two groups to undergo arthroscopic ACL reconstruction using quadrupled hamstring graft (n=20) and bone patellar tendon bone auto graft (n=20) utilizing bioscrew by aperture fixation method in both the groups. They were compared post operatively for symptomatic improvement, clinical and rolimeter laxity tests and Lysholm functional knee scoring at 02 year.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> At the end of 02 years laxity measurement by rolimeter showed slightly better results in BPTB group; however it was not statistically significant (p value= 0.362). Knee pain at the end of 02 year was slightly more in HT groups (45%) as compared to BPTB group (35%) but not significant (p value =0.748). Instability symptoms are comparable in both the groups (sense of giving away on exertion). Manual laxity testing by Lachman and Pivot shift tests were comparable in both the groups with p value of 0.695 and 0.999 respectively. Lysholm functional knee score also showed no statistical significance (p value =0.957).</p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> There is no significant difference between HT and BPTB auto grafts in terms of clinical and functional outcome at the end of 02 years. </p>