Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Orthopaedics
Published in: International Orthopaedics 8/2016

01-08-2016 | Original Paper

Reversed distal femoral locking plate for failed proximal femoral nail with non-union of proximal femoral fractures

Authors: Raju Vaishya, Amit Kumar Agarwal, Nishint Gupta, Vipul Vijay

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 8/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Failure of proximal femoral fracture managed by proximal femoral nail (PFN) leads to a very difficult situation to handle with conventional techniques, and reversed distal femoral locking compression plate (DF-LCP) is of great benefit in these selective cases.

Methods

Twelve patients with ununited proximal femoral fractures including subtrochanteric fractures with a failed PFN implant were included in the study. All patients with periprosthetic fractures and fractures treated by implants other than PFN were excluded from this study.

Result

All fractures went into union in an average time of nine months and 15 days with no implant failures. The mean time of re-osteosynthesis after the primary index surgery of PFN was one year eight months. Mean surgical time of re-osteosynthesis was 110 minutes, and average blood loss during surgery was 550 ml.

Discussion

The PFM is one of the most commonly used implant for unstable proximal femur fractures. The use of PFN is technically demanding and is associated with high failure rates. Although dynamic compression screw (DCS), proximal femoral locking plate (PF-LCP) and other implants can be used in these failed situations, they are associated with a high complication rate. The reversed DF-LCP is a rescue implant for these complex situations. Apart from anatomical and biomechanical advantages, there are several other clinical benefits of using DF-LCP.

Conclusion

We conclude that DF-LCP is a potential and safe implant of choice for the management of nonunion associated with failed PFN. It may be considered an implant of choice as rescue from such a complex situation. It offers several anatomical, biomechanical and clinical advantages over other available conventional implants.
Literature
1.
Schipper IB, Steyerberg EW, Castelein RM et al (2004) Treatment of unstable trochanteric fractures: randomized comparison of the gamma nail and the proximal femoral nail. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 86(1):86–94
2.
3.
Davis TR, Sher JL, Horsman A et al (1990) Intertrochanteric femoral fractures: mechanical failure after internal fixation. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 72(1):26–31
4.
Boldin C, Seibert FJ, Fankhauser F et al (2003) The proximal femoral nail (PFN)—a minimal invasive treatment of unstable proximal femoral fracturesA prospective study of 55 patients with a follow-up of 15 months. Acta Orthop Scand 74(1):53–58CrossRefPubMed
5.
Simmermacher RKJ, Bosch AM, Van der Werken C (1999) The AO/ASIF-proximal femoral nail (PFN): a new device for the treatment of unstable proximal femoral fractures. Injury 30:327–332CrossRefPubMed
6.
Kanthimathi B, Narayanan VL (2012) Early complications in proximal femoral nailing done for treatment of subtrochanteric fractures. Malays Orthop J 6(1):25–9PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Lee WT, Murphy D, Kagda FH et al (2014) Proximal femoral locking compression plate for proximal femoral fractures. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 22:287–293
8.
Newey ML, Ricketts D, Roberts L (1993) The AO classification of long bone fractures: an early study of its use in clinical practice. Injury 24(5):309–12CrossRefPubMed
9.
Ehlingera M, Brinkerta D, Bessea J et al (2011) Reversed anatomic distal femur locking plate for periprosthetic hip fracture fixation. Orthop Traumatol: Surg Res 97:560–564
10.
Pape HC, Tarkin IS (2009) Intraoperative reduction techniques for difficult femoral fractures. J Orthop Trauma 23(5):S6–11CrossRefPubMed
11.
Cummings SR, Melton LJ (2002) Epidemiology and outcomes of osteoporotic fractures. Lancet 359:1761–1767CrossRefPubMed
12.
Tencer AF, Johnson KD, Johnston D et al (1984) A biomechanical comparison of various methods of stabilization of subtrochanteric fractures of the femur. J Orthop Res 2:297–305CrossRefPubMed
13.
Kang SH, Han SK, Kim YS et al (2013) Treatment of subtrochanteric nonunion of the femur: whether to leave or to exchange the previous hardware. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 47(2):91–95CrossRefPubMed
14.
Bredbenner TL, Snyder SA, Mazloomi FR et al (2005) Subtrochanteric fixation stability depends on discrete fracture surface points. Clin Orthop Relat Res 432:217–225CrossRefPubMed
15.
Parker MJ, Dutta BK, Sivaji C et al (1997) Subtrochanteric fractures of the femur. Injury 28:91–95CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zhou F, Zhang ZS, Yang H et al (2012) Less invasive stabilization system (LISS) versus proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) in treating proximal femoral fractures: a prospective randomized study. J Orthop Trauma 26:155–162CrossRefPubMed
17.
Tyllianakis M, Panagopoulos A et al (2004) Treatment of extracapsular hip fractures with the proximal femoral nail (PFN): long-term results in 45 patients. Acta Orthop Belg 70:444–454PubMed
18.
Werner-Tutschku W, Lajtai G, Schmiedhuber G et al (2002) Intra-und perioperative Komplikationen bei der Stabilisierungvon per-und subtrochantären Femur fracturen mittels. PFN. Unfallchirurg 105:881–885CrossRefPubMed
19.
20.
Sanders R, Regazzoni P (1989) Treatment of subtrochanteric femur fractures using the dynamic condylar screw. J Orthop Trauma 3(3):206–13CrossRefPubMed
21.
Sahin S, Ertürer E, Oztürk I et al (2010) Radiographic and functional results of osteosynthesis using the proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) in the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric femoral fractures. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 44(2):127–34CrossRefPubMed
22.
Simmermacher RKJ, Ljungqvist J, Bail H et al (2008) The new proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) in daily practice- results of a multicentre clinical study. Injury 39:932–939CrossRefPubMed
23.
Haq RU, Manhas V, Pankaj A et al (2014) Proximal femoral nails compared with reverse distal femoral locking plates in intertrochanteric fractures with a compromised lateral wall; a randomized controlled trial. Int Orthop 38(7):1443–1449CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Reversed distal femoral locking plate for failed proximal femoral nail with non-union of proximal femoral fractures
Authors
Raju Vaishya
Amit Kumar Agarwal
Nishint Gupta
Vipul Vijay
Publication date
01-08-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
International Orthopaedics / Issue 8/2016
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-3002-5

Other articles of this Issue 8/2016

International Orthopaedics 8/2016 Go to the issue

Original Paper

Locked plate versus retrograde intramedullary nail for periprosthetic femur fractures above total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis

Original Paper

Joint line level in revision total knee replacement: assessment and functional results with an average of seven years follow-up

Original Paper

Displaced femoral shaft fractures treated by antegrade nailing with the assistance of an intramedullary reduction device

Original Paper

Biomechanical evaluation of different surgical techniques for treating patellar tendon ruptures

Original Paper

Non-operative treatment of four-part fractures of the proximal end of the humerus: results of a prospective and retrospective multicentric study

Original Paper

Latarjet procedure: is the coracoid enough to restore the glenoid surface?