Top

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

Published in:

01-09-2013 | Symposium: Tscherne Festschrift

Which Implant Is Better for Treating Reverse Obliquity Fractures of the Proximal Femur: A Standard or Long Nail?

Authors: Güvenir Okcu, MD, Nadir Ozkayin, MD, Cemil Okta, MD, Ismet Topcu, MD, Kemal Aktuglu, MD

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 9/2013

Abstract

Background

Reverse obliquity fractures of the proximal femur have biomechanical characteristics distinct from other intertrochanteric fractures and high implant failure rate when treated with sliding hip screws. Intramedullary hip nailing for these fractures reportedly has less potential for cut-out of the lag screw because of their loadbearing capacity when compared with extramedullary implants. However, it is unclear whether nail length influences healing.

Questions/purposes

We compared standard and long types of intramedullary hip nails in terms of (1) reoperation (fixation failure), (2) 1-year mortality rate, (3) function and mobility, and (4) union rate.

Methods

We conducted a pilot prospective randomized controlled trial comparing standard versus long (≥ 34 cm) intramedullary hip nails for reverse obliquity fractures of the proximal femur from January 2009 to December 2009. There were 15 patients with standard nails and 18 with long nails. Mean age was 79 years (range, 67–95 years). We determined 1-year mortality rates, reoperation rates, Parker-Palmer mobility and Harris hip scores, and radiographic findings (fracture union, blade cut-out, tip-apex distance, implant failure). Minimum followup was 12 months (mean, 14 months; range, 12–20 months).

Results

We found no difference in reoperation rates between groups. Two patients (both from the long-nail group) underwent revision surgery because of implant failure in one and deep infection in the other. There was no difference between the standard- and long-nail groups in mortality rate (17% versus 18%), Parker-Palmer mobility score (five versus six), Harris hip score (74 versus 79), union rate (100% in both groups), blade cut-out (zero versus one), and tip-apex distance (22 versus 24 mm).

Conclusions

Our preliminary data suggest reverse obliquity fractures of the trochanteric region of the femur can be treated with either standard or long intramedullary nails.

Level of Evidence

Level II, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Banan H, Al-Sabti A, Jimulia T, Hart AJ. The treatment of unstable extracapsular hip fractures with AO/ASIF proximal femoral nail (PFN)—our first 60 cases. Injury. 2002;33:401–405.PubMedCrossRef

Barquet A, Francesescoli L, Rienzi D, Lopez L. Intertrochanteric-subtrochanteric fractures: treatment with the long Gamma nail. J Orthop Trauma. 2000;14:324–328.PubMedCrossRef

Barton TM, Gleeson R, Topliss C, Greenwood R, Harries WJ, Chesser TJS. A comparison of the long Gamma nail with sliding hip screw for the treatment of AO/OTA 31-A2 fractures of the proximal part of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92:792–798.PubMedCrossRef

Baumgaertner MR, Curtin SL, Lindskog DM. Intramedullary versus extramedullary fixation for the treatment of intertrochanteric hip fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;348:87–94.PubMedCrossRef

Baumgaertner MR, Curtin SL, Lindskog DM, Keggi JM. The value of the tip-apex distance in predicting failure of fixation of peritrochanteric fractures of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77:1058–1064.PubMed

Bjorgul K, Reikeras O. Outcome after treatment complications of Gamma nailing: a prospective study of 554 trochanteric fractures. Acta Orthop. 2007;78:231–235.PubMedCrossRef

Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–213.PubMedCrossRef

Elis J, Chechik O, Maman E, Steinberg EL. Expandable proximal femoral nails versus 95° dynamic condylar screw-plates for the treatment of reverse oblique intertrochanteric fractures. Injury. 2012;43:1313–1317.PubMedCrossRef

Forte ML, Virnig BA, Kane RL, Durham S, Bhandari M, Feldman R, Swiontkowski MF. Geographic variation in device use for intertrochanteric hip fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:691–699.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Haidukewych GJ, Israel TA, Berry DJ. Reverse obliquity fractures of the intertrochanteric region of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83:643–650.PubMed

11.

Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51:737–755.PubMed

12.

Honkonen SE, Vihtonen K, Jarvinen MJ. Second generation cephalomedullary nails in the treatment of reverse obliquity intertrochanteric fractures of the proximal femur. Injury. 2004;35:179–183.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Kregor PJ, Obremskey WT, Kreder HJ, Swiontkowski MF. Unstable pertrochanteric femoral fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2005;19:63–66.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Kyle RF, Gustilo RB, Premer RF. Biomechanical analysis of the sliding characteristics of compression hip screws. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1980;62:1308–1314.PubMed

15.

Mahomed N, Harrington I, Kellam J, Maistrelli G, Hearn T, Vroemen J. Biomechanical analysis of the Gamma nail and sliding hip screw. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;304:280–288.PubMed

16.

Marsh JL, Slongo TF, Agel J, Broderick JS, Creevy W, DeCoster TA, Prokuski L, Sirkin MS, Ziran B, Henley B, Audige L. Fracture and dislocation classification compendium-2007: Orthopaedic Trauma Association classification, database and outcomes committee. J Orthop Trauma. 2007;21:S1–S133.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Min WK, Kim SY, Kim TK, Lee KB, Cho MR, Ha YC, Koo KH. Proximal femoral nail for the treatment of reverse obliquity intertrochanteric fractures compared with Gamma nail. J Trauma. 2007;63:1054–1060.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Ozkan K, Eceviz E, Unay K, Tasyikan L, Akman B, Eren A. Treatment of reverse oblique trochanteric femoral fractures with proximal femoral nail. Int Orthop. 2011;35:595–598.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Park SY, Yang KH, Yoo JH, Yoon HK, Park HW. The treatment of reverse obliquity intertrochanteric fractures with intramedullary hip nail. J Trauma. 2008;65:852–857.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Parker MJ, Handoll HH. Gamma and other cephalocondylic intramedullary nails versus extramedullary implants for extracapsular hip fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;3:CD000093.

21.

Parker MJ, Palmer CR. A new mobility score for predicting mortality after hip fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993;75:797–798.PubMed

22.

Sadowski C, Lübbeke A, Saudan M, Riand N, Stern R, Hoffmeyer P. Treatment of reverse oblique and transverse intertrochanteric fractures with use of an intramedullary nail or a 95 degrees screw-plate: a prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84:372–381.PubMed

23.

Saghaei M. Random allocation software. Version 1.0.0. Available at: http://mahmoodsaghaei.tripod.com/Softwares/dnld/RA.zip. Accessed January 19, 2005.

24.

Saudan M, Lübbeke A, Sadowski C, Riand N, Stern R, Hoffmeyer P. Pertrochanteric fractures: is there an advantage to an intramedullary nail? A randomized, prospective study of 206 patients comparing the dynamic hip screw and proximal femoral nail. J Orthop Trauma. 2002;16:386–393.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Schipper IB, Steyerberg EW, Castelein RM, Van der Heijden FH, Den Hoed PT, Kerver AJ, Van Vugt AB. Treatment of unstable trochanteric fractures: randomized comparison of the Gamma nail and the proximal femoral nail. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004;86:86–94.PubMed

26.

Utrilla AL, Reig JS, Munoz FM, Tufanisco CB. Trochanteric gamma nail and compression hip screw for trochanteric fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2005;19:229–233.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Weller I, Wai EK, Jaglal S, Kreder HJ. The effect of hospital type and surgical delay on mortality after surgery for hip fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87:361–366.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Willoughby R. Dynamic hip screw in the management of reverse obliquity intertrochanteric neck of femur fractures. Injury. 2005;36:105–109.PubMedCrossRef

Title: Which Implant Is Better for Treating Reverse Obliquity Fractures of the Proximal Femur: A Standard or Long Nail?
Authors: Güvenir Okcu, MD
Nadir Ozkayin, MD
Cemil Okta, MD
Ismet Topcu, MD
Kemal Aktuglu, MD
Publication date: 01-09-2013
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 9/2013
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-2948-0

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Which Implant Is Better for Treating Reverse Obliquity Fractures of the Proximal Femur: A Standard or Long Nail?

Abstract

Background

Questions/purposes

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Level of Evidence

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Questions/purposes

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Level of Evidence

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 9/2013

Is the Transplant Quality at the Time of Surgery Adequate for Matrix-guided Autologous Cartilage Transplantation? A Pilot Study

What Is the Success of Treatment of Hip and Knee Candidal Periprosthetic Joint Infection?

Trauma Care in Germany: An Inclusive System

Posterior Condylar Offset Does Not Correlate With Knee Flexion After TKA

Is Premorbid Glenoid Anatomy Altered in Patients with Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis?

The Peripheral Neuronal Phenotype is Important in the Pathogenesis of Painful Human Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review