The dynamic locking blade plate, a new implant for intracapsular hip fractures: Biomechanical comparison with the sliding hip screw and Twin Hook

Roerdink, W.H.; Aalsma, A.M.M.; Nijenbanning, G.; Walsum, A. D. P. van

doi:10.1016/j.injury.2008.08.041

Cited by 25 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is currently no consensus about which type of implant to use or what technique to perform in patients with stable intertrochanteric fractures previously treated with DHS fixation or PFNA. Some studies reported no difference in the clinical and radiological outcomes [7–12, 19, 20], while others reported higher complication rates and revision rates for one approach after CTHA [17, 21]. To address this controversy, we compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of CTHA after a failed PFNA or DHS fixation for stable intertrochanteric fractures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conversion to total hip arthroplasty after failed proximal femoral nail antirotations or dynamic hip screw fixations for stable intertrochanteric femur fractures: a retrospective study with a minimum follow-up of 3 years

Zeng

Zhan

Zhang

et al. 2017

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundConversion to total hip arthroplasty (CTHA) is a relatively common procedure after a failed dynamic hip screw (DHS) or proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) fixation of intertrochanteric fractures, but there have been far fewer reports specifically describing the long-term results of CTHA after failed treatments of stable intertrochanteric fractures with DHS or PFNA. The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of CTHA after failed PFNA or DHS fixations of stable intertrochanteric fractures after a minimum follow-up of 3 years.MethodsBetween January 2005 and April 2014, we retrospectively reviewed 142 active elderly patients treated at our institution (a single institution study). A total of 72 patients (72 hips; 41 women, 31 men; mean age 76.9 years old; range 60–92 years old) who underwent conversion of a failed PFNA to a THA were compared with 70 patients (70 hips; 36 women, 34 men; mean age 75.0 years old; range 60–90 years old) who underwent CTHA after a failed DHS fixation. The mean follow-up periods were 48 (range 43–52) and 48 (range 44–52) months for the DHS and PFNA groups, respectively. Clinical and radiologic evaluations were performed on all patients. The primary outcome was the Harris Hip Score (HHS). The secondary outcomes were the complication rates.ResultsThe Harris Hip Score (HHS) improved from 50.61 ± 3.23 preoperatively to 85.28 ± 4.45 at the last follow-up in the PFNA group and from 51.46 ± 3.90 to 84.50 ± 4.34 in the DHS group, with no significant differences noted between the groups at each follow-up (P > 0.05). However, the complication rate in the converted DHS patients was significantly higher (42.9%) than that in the converted PFNA patients (20.8%; P = 0.003). Thirty-seven PFFs (2.4%) occurred during a mean follow-up of 44.4 months. The incidence of periprosthetic fractures was found to be significantly higher (P = 0.021) for the DHS group (15.7%) than for the PFNA group (4.2%).ConclusionsCTHA after failed DHS fixations of stable intertrochanteric fractures might be associated with a significantly higher complication rate than CTHA after failed PFNA fixations. Therefore, PFNA patients with stable intertrochanteric fractures may be more suitable for CTHA.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conversion to total hip arthroplasty after failed proximal femoral nail antirotations or dynamic hip screw fixations for stable intertrochanteric femur fractures: a retrospective study with a minimum follow-up of 3 years

Zeng

Zhan

Zhang

et al. 2017

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the comparative study of composite femurs and cadaver femurs, 4th generation composite femurs from Sawbones were chosen (Sawbones, Pacific Research Laboratories, Inc. Vashon, Wa, USA). This was due to the extensive use of these replicas in biomechanical experiments (Brandt et al 2006, Roerdink et al 2009, Alves et al 2010, Zdero et al 2010, Eberle et al 2012, Nowotarski et al 2012). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous attempts have been made to improve the stability of an implant operated into porous bone (Curtis et al 2005). Several options exist to anchor the implant within the femoral head: screws with varying tread designs, screws with additional talons, pins with hooks and helical blades (Olsson et al 2002, Bramlet and Wheeler 2003, Roerdink et al 2009, O'Neill et al 2011. A screw's holding power is determined by its inner and outer diameter, the pitch (distance between threads), depth and length of the screw threads , Ramaswamy et al 2010.…”

Section: Fixation In Porous Bonementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Internal fixation of fragility fracturesof the femoral neck

Basso¹

2015

Acta Orthopaedica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The failure rate after internal fixation of undisplaced femoral neck fractures is 8–14 % [8–13]. The potential disadvantages of the conventional implants are rotational and/or angular instability combined with a relative high implant volume in the femoral head [14]. The aim of this study was to register the results in the internal fixation of undisplaced femoral neck fractures by means of the DLBP.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low failure rate by means of DLBP fixation of undisplaced femoral neck fractures

Walsum

Vroemen

Janzing

et al. 2016

Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThis study evaluated the clinical results of a new implant in the internal fixation of undisplaced femoral neck fractures.MethodIrrespective of their age, 149 patients with undisplaced (Garden I and II) femoral neck fractures were included in a prospective multicentre clinical cohort study and were treated by internal fixation by means of the Dynamic Locking Blade Plate (DLBP). The mean age was 69 years and the follow-up at least one year.ResultsThe DLBP fixation resulted in 6 out of 149 failures caused by AVN (2x), non-union (2x), loss of fixation (3x) or combination of these.ConclusionThe fixation of undisplaced femoral neck fractures by the DLBP resulted in a low failure rate of 4 %.

show abstract

The dynamic locking blade plate, a new implant for intracapsular hip fractures: Biomechanical comparison with the sliding hip screw and Twin Hook

Cited by 25 publications

References 21 publications

Conversion to total hip arthroplasty after failed proximal femoral nail antirotations or dynamic hip screw fixations for stable intertrochanteric femur fractures: a retrospective study with a minimum follow-up of 3 years

Conversion to total hip arthroplasty after failed proximal femoral nail antirotations or dynamic hip screw fixations for stable intertrochanteric femur fractures: a retrospective study with a minimum follow-up of 3 years

Internal fixation of fragility fracturesof the femoral neck

Low failure rate by means of DLBP fixation of undisplaced femoral neck fractures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About