2002
DOI: 10.1007/s101950200017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Use of a modified IMHS for unstable intertrochanteric fractures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The sliding system allows proximal fragment telescopes along the helical blade after loading, which increases osseous contact between the proximal and distal fragment, maintains a constant neck-shaft angle, and reduces the risk of cut-out, cut through, and nonunion compared with previous implants without a sliding mechanism [ 17 , 18 ]. However, this sliding system may also increase the risk of excessive backout of lag screw/ helical blade [ 19 , 20 ], resulting in hip pain, unacceptable shortening, or rotation deformity of the limb with poor function [ 21 , 22 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The sliding system allows proximal fragment telescopes along the helical blade after loading, which increases osseous contact between the proximal and distal fragment, maintains a constant neck-shaft angle, and reduces the risk of cut-out, cut through, and nonunion compared with previous implants without a sliding mechanism [ 17 , 18 ]. However, this sliding system may also increase the risk of excessive backout of lag screw/ helical blade [ 19 , 20 ], resulting in hip pain, unacceptable shortening, or rotation deformity of the limb with poor function [ 21 , 22 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Controlling fracture impaction through axial telescoping and rotational stability is essential in unstable proximal femoral fractures [2224]. These factors allow direct contact between the fracture fragments, and promote healing, while decreasing the moment arm and consequent stresses on the implant.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%