Comparative evaluation of dynamic hip screw and proximal femoral nail for fracture of intertrochanteric femur

Yadav, Sachin; Srivastava, D. C.; Shukla, Manish

doi:10.18203/issn.2455-4510.intjresorthop20164033

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…5 Yadav et al, in their study assessing 96 cases road traffic accidents constituted 50.8% of cases. 7 In our study average union time was 14.5 weeks, ranging from 10 weeks to 19 weeks. Gadegone et al in their study comprising 82 fractures average time for union was 14.2 weeks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

Closed reduction and proximal femoral nailing in the management of intertrochanteric fractures: a prospective study

Santosha

2018

Int J Res Orthop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The proximal femoral nail was introduced by A.O/AISF in 1996. Since then various studies were taken in support and against of PFN in the treatment of trochanteric fractures.2 Our study was conducted to evaluate the ABSTRACT Background: Open reduction and dynamic hip screw with plate was considered as the standard method of treatment for intertrochantric fracture of femur previously. With the introduction of proximal femoral nails, closed reduction and proximal femoral nailing are used extensively for the treatment of intertrochantric fractures in the last two decades. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the functional outcome in early treatment of intertrochanteric fractures of Femur by closed reduction and proximal femoral nailing. Methods: Study was conducted in the department of orthopaedics in Regional Institute of Medical Sciences (RIMS), Imphal, Manipur, from August 2014 to August 2016. Forty cases of intertrochantric fractures are treated with proximal femoral nails. Patients were followed up for a period of 24 weeks. The modified Harris hip score (MMHS) was used to evaluate the functional outcome of surgery. Results: Forty consecutive patients were included in this study. Fractures were classified according to Boyd and Griffin classification system. According to the classification 16 cases were type I, 14 cases were type II, 5 were type III and 5 were of type IV. After 12 months of follow-up, all 40 patients were available for evaluation. Radiological union was achieved in a mean time of 14.5 weeks. MHHS was excellent in 13 patients good in 16 patients, fair in 8 patients and poor in 3 patients. Conclusions: Proximal femoral nailing systems are minimally invasive techniques with shorter operative time and good union rate.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

Closed reduction and proximal femoral nailing in the management of intertrochanteric fractures: a prospective study

Santosha

2018

Int J Res Orthop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… In study by Ravi Shankar et al, in 2015-showed PFN (91.7%) has good to excellent result compared to DHS (75%) [17] .  Jakkala et al in 2019 [18] , Chaitanya et al in 2015 [19] , Kumar R et al in 2012 [20] , Jose et al in 2017 [21] , Yadav et al in 2016 [22] , Mundla et al in 2017 [23] , Chowdhary et al in 2017 [24] , Jonnes et al in 2016 [25] , Nuber et al in 2003 [25] , Zhang et al in 2014 [27] , Avinash Kumar et al…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of dynamic hip screw vs proximal femoral nail for inter-trochanter-IC fracture of femur

Krishna¹,

Khader²,

Varman³

2021

Int. J. Orthop. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inter-trochanteric fracture of femur are common in geriatric population. Urbanization & sedentary life style are the primary cause of increased incidence of these fracture's. Distribution of Inter-trochanteric femur fracture's is limited in male population compared to female due to osteoporosis. Aim is to compare inter-trochanteric fracture's treated with DHS (vs) PFN. We performed a narrative review to evaluate the outcome of DH (Dynamic hip) Screw (VS) PF (Proximal femoral) Nail for inter-trochanteric fracture of femur. Extensive electronic search of article's were done in Google scholar, reference checking and PUB-MED for deciding which implant is better. Some studies' reveal PF Nail to be better than DH Screw, while some studies' show vice versa. Both surgeries' are time tested, absolute & require reasonable amount of skill. Final decision depends on operative surgeon's preference to specific technique.

show abstract

“…The surgical management was primary treatment choice for intertrochanteric fractures. It is always aims to restore the anatomy and function without prolonged immobilization [2] . Surgical management with stable fixation allows early mobilization and reduces postoperative complications.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of intertrochanteric hip fractures by proximal femoral nail and dynamic hip screw fixation: A comparative study

Patil¹

2021

Int. J. Orthop. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intertrochanteric fractures are significantly increasing in older adults. Treatment choices for trochanteric fractures include intramedullary nail and extra medullary fixation, even though the appropriate treatment choices for such fractures remain controversial. The present study was aimed to assess optimal treatment option for intertrochanteric fractures to determine which method i.e. proximal femoral nailing (PFN) and dynamic hip screw fixation (DHS) gives minimal post-operative complications, minimal blood loss and minimal duration surgery. A total of 46 cases with intertrochanteric fractures attending Department of Orthopedics were recruited. Cases were randomly allocated to PFN (Group 1) and DHS (Group 2). The intra-operative, early and late complications were recorded, and the functional outcome of each group was assessed. Road traffic accidents were most common cause of fractures in both groups. In group 1, the mean length of incision (9.56 cm), duration of surgery (71.45 min), fluoroscopy time (72.66) and total intraoperative blood loss (138 ml). In group 2, the mean length of incision (15.89 cm), duration of surgery (89.18 min), fluoroscopy time (59.38) and total intraoperative blood loss (322 ml). Cases treated with PFN had excellent outcome in 21.7%, good in 69.56%, fair in 8.69% and none of the case had poor outcome. Whereas in DHS group, excellent outcome in 21.7%, good in 43.47%, fair in 21.7% and poor in 13.04%. Both PFN and DHS had similar functional outcome. However, PFN had significantly more desirable functional outcome. PFN requires a smaller incision, shorter surgical duration, less intraoperative blood loss and post-operative complication than DHS group.

show abstract

Comparative evaluation of dynamic hip screw and proximal femoral nail for fracture of intertrochanteric femur

Cited by 8 publications

References 13 publications

Closed reduction and proximal femoral nailing in the management of intertrochanteric fractures: a prospective study

Closed reduction and proximal femoral nailing in the management of intertrochanteric fractures: a prospective study

A review of dynamic hip screw vs proximal femoral nail for inter-trochanter-IC fracture of femur

Management of intertrochanteric hip fractures by proximal femoral nail and dynamic hip screw fixation: A comparative study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About