Comparative results of percutaneous cannulated screws, dynamic compression type plate and screw for the treatment of femoral neck fractures

Kaplan, Tolga; Akesen, Burak; Demirağ, Burak; Bilgen, Sadık; Durak, Kemal

doi:10.5505/tjtes.2012.33427

Cited by 24 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(56 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There was a moderate risk bias for the RCTs: four studies mentioned random sequence regeneration [17,18,23,27], six studies mentioned allocation concealment [17,18,[23][24][25][26], two studies used the blinding of participants [17,18], one study used observed blinding [17], eight studies reported complete outcome [17,18,20,21,23,24,26,27], and nine studies reported all outcome date without reporting bias [17,18,20,21,[23][24][25][26][27]. For retrospective cohort studies, three studies had 9 scores [9,10,28], two studies had 8 scores [15,19], and two studies had 7 scores [16,22]. The details were shown in Fig.…”

Section: Characteristics and Qualities Of The Studies Includedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic hip screws versus cannulated screws for femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Zhao

Yang

et al. 2020

J Orthop Surg Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Dynamic hip screw (DHS) and cannulated screws (CS) are widely used for femoral neck fractures. However, there is no definite result as to which surgical method bring less complications. We performed this study to compare the complication (mortality, non-union, avascular necrosis (AVN), and revision) of DHS and CS for the treatment of femoral neck fractures patients. Methods: We searched Pubmed, Ovid, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and other relevant studies related the comparison of DHS versus CS for femoral neck fractures from inception to Jan 7, 2020. The quality of the included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool and Newcastle-Ottawa (NOS), respectively. The meta-analysis was performed by the RevMan 5.2 software. Results: Nine RCTs and seven retrospective cohort studies were included for meta-analysis. CS was found to be superior to DHS with respect to AVN rate (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.08-1.99; p = 0.01, I 2 = 0%). There were no significant between-group differences with respect to mortality, non-union, and revision (p > 0.05). Conclusion: DHS and CS have similar complication including mortality, revision rate, and non-union, but CS has superior to DHS on ANV. However, further studies are required to provide more robust evidence owing to some limitations.

show abstract

Section: Characteristics and Qualities Of The Studies Includedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic hip screws versus cannulated screws for femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Zhao

Yang

et al. 2020

J Orthop Surg Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[20] Internal fixation is currently more widely used than arthroplasty because of the low cost and treatment of patient's own bone. [21] The findings of this study indicate that DHS/ antirotation screw is a more relevant treatment method for femoral neck fractures compared to CS, with more favorable functional outcomes and less fluoroscopy exposure. [22] In the present study, the non-union rates were evaluated as 12% in group 1 and 21% in group 2.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…In a study by Singh et al, [27] the operation time was found to be shorter in the CS group compared to patients who underwent DHS (55.6 minutes in the cannulated group vs. 86 minutes in the DHS group). In another study by Kaplan et al, [21] a significant difference was found between the operation times of the groups: 46 minutes (range, 15 to 60 minutes) in the CS group and 95 minutes (range, 50 to 240 minutes) in the DHS group. In the present study, the mean operation time in group 1 of 51.7 minutes was significantly shorter than the 73.1 minutes of group 2.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…In a study by Kaplan et al, [21] the mean hip score was reported to be 91 (range, 65 to 100) in patients applied CSs and 80 (range, 75 to 99) in those with DHS, with no statistically significant difference between the groups. In contrast, Sivashi [17] reported a mean Harris hip score of 83 (range, 60 to 100) in the CS group and 92 (range, 65 to 100) in the DHS group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of dynamic hip screw and antirotation screw with cannulated screw in the treatment of transcervical collum femoris fractures

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Femoral neck fractures in young patients are mostly seen after high-energy trauma. Internal fixation methods are the gold treatment choice in young, healthy, and active patients with good bone quality. [1] Potential complications after trauma and surgery make the treatment of these fractures more challenging. Various surgical methods and fixation options have been proposed for the surgical treatment of femoral neck fractures. [2] Anatomic reduction is the most important factor in internal fixation of femoral neck fractures. The time to surgery (from trauma to operating theatre), capsulotomy, and the implant choices are controversial in the literature. [3] Many types of implants are used for internal fixation of femoral neck fractures. [3] Osteosynthesis with cannulated screws (CSs) and dynamic hip screws (DHSs) are the most commonly used modalities. [4] Although internal fixation of femoral neck fractures provides blood flow to the femoral neck, complications such as non-union and avascular necrosis (AVN) are still seen in 10-20% and 10-30% of cases, respectively. [5,6] In addition, joint replacement is performed in 20-36% of these Objectives: This study aims to compare the results of internal fixation with dynamic hip screw (DHS)/antirotation screw and conventional cannulated screw (CS) for femoral neck fracture. Patients and methods: This retrospective study included a total of 78 patients (57 males, 21 females) with collum femoris fractures treated with internal fixation between January 2015 and January 2019. Group 1 comprised 41 patients with a mean age of 45.7 years (range, 19 to 62 years) treated with DHSs/antirotation screws, while group 2 comprised 37 patients with a mean age of 41.9 years (range, 17 to 75 years) treated with CSs. The patients were evaluated for union, avascular necrosis (AVN), femoral neck shortness, operation time, duration of fluoroscopy exposure, and functional outcomes. Results: Age, gender, and Garden classification stages were similar in both groups. No significant difference was found between the groups in respect of AVN and non-union rates. The non-union rate was 12.2% in group 1 and 21.6% in group 2 (p>0.05). The duration of fluoroscopy exposure was statistically significantly higher in group 2 (p=0.001) and the operation time was statistically significantly longer in group 1 (p=0.001). In group 2, femoral neck shortness stature was significantly higher (p=0.007). At the final follow-up examination, the Harris hip score was statistically significantly higher in group 1 (p=0.04). Conclusion: Dynamic hip screw/antirotation screw was a more relevant treatment method for transcervical femoral neck fractures compared to CS with more favorable functional outcomes and less fluoroscopy exposure.

show abstract

“…Locking screws can be used for this purpose [13]. Displacement at the time of first fracture rather than implant selection is the major cause of avascular necrosis [14]. Optimizing stability of femoral neck fracture fixation is important in obtaining a successful outcome [15].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Femoral anteromedial surface plate augmentation in an osteoporotic unstable femoral neck fracture

2020

Ann Clin Anal Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The technique of direct reduction with an anterior hip approach and the application of an anteromedial femoral neck plate is an alternative method increasing stability in the treatment of femoral neck fractures in young patients. Here we present the case of applying this method to a 33-year-old young patient with epilepsy and osteoporosis. Satisfactory clinical results were obtained in the short-term follow-up results. This study and literature review can be considered to contribute to the limited literature in this area. Nevertheless, there is a need for further studies in this field with more extensive case series with long-term results.

show abstract

Comparative results of percutaneous cannulated screws, dynamic compression type plate and screw for the treatment of femoral neck fractures

Cited by 24 publications

References 38 publications

Dynamic hip screws versus cannulated screws for femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Dynamic hip screws versus cannulated screws for femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparison of dynamic hip screw and antirotation screw with cannulated screw in the treatment of transcervical collum femoris fractures

Femoral anteromedial surface plate augmentation in an osteoporotic unstable femoral neck fracture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About