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
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Orthopaedics
Published in: International Orthopaedics 1/2004

01-02-2004 | Original Paper

Unstable subtrochanteric fractures—gamma nail versus dynamic condylar screw

Author: Andrés J. Pakuts

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 1/2004

Login to get access

Abstract

We reviewed the operative treatment of subtrochanteric fractures. Before 1999, 15 fractures were treated with a dynamic condylar screw (DCS) and after 1999, 11 fractures were treated with a gamma nail (GN). The mean age of all patients was 70 (31–92) years, and the mean follow up was 16 (9–30) months for the DCS group and 14 (6–26) months for the GN group. All fractures united. There were no infections or implant cut out. In the DCS group, there was one malunion in varus and one late fracture of the implant. In the GN group, there was one malunion in internal rotation and three intraoperative fractures. Functional evaluation showed no significant differences in pain, range of movement, or walking ability, but recovery was significantly earlier in the GN group.
Literature
1.
Adams CI, Robinson CM, Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM (2001) Prospective randomized controlled trial of an intramedullary nail versus dynamic screw and plate for intertrochanteric fractures of the femur. J Orthop Trauma 15:394–400CrossRefPubMed
2.
Barquet A, Francescoli L, Rienzi D, López L (2000) Intertrochanteric subtrochanteric fractures: treatment with the long Gamma nail. J Orthop Trauma 14:324–328CrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
Haynes RC, Miles AW (1997) Comparative dynamic evaluation of the sliding/characteristics of the Gamma nail: a biomechanical analysis. Proc Inst Mech Eng (H) 211:411–417
5.
Haynes RC, Poll Rg, Miles AW, Weston RB (1997) Failure of femoral head fixation: a cadaveric analysis of lag screw cut–out with the gamma locking nail and AO dynamic hip screw. Injury 28:337–341CrossRefPubMed
6.
Hotz TK, Zellweger R, Kach KP (1999) Minimal invasive treatment of proximal femur fractures with the long gamma nail: indication, technique, results. J Trauma 47:942–949
7.
Kukla C, Heinz T, Gaebler C, Heinze G, Vecsei V (2001) The standard Gamma nail: a critical analysis of 1,000 cases. J Trauma 51:77–83PubMed
8.
Madsen JE, Naess L, Aune AK, Alho A, Ekeland A, Stromsoe K (1998) Dynamic hip screw with trochanteric stabilizing plate in the treatment of unstable proximal femoral fractures: a comparative study with the Gamma nail compression hip screw. J Orthop Trauma 12:241–248CrossRefPubMed
9.
Mahomed N, Harrington I, Kellam J, Maistrelli G, Hearn T, Vroeme J (1994) Biomechanical analysis of the Gamma nail and sliding hip screw. Clin Orthop 304:280–288PubMed
10.
Park SR, Kang JS, Kim HS, Lee WH, Kim YH (1998) Treatment of intertrochanteric fracture with the Gamma AP locking nail or by a compression hip screw—a randomised prospective trial. Int Orthop 22:157–160CrossRefPubMed
11.
Parker MJ, Handoll HH (2000) Gamma and other cephalocondylic intramedullary nails versus extramedullary implants for extracapsular hip fractures. Cochrane Database Syst Rev
12.
Parker MJ, Prior GA (1996) Gamma versus DHS nailing for extracapsular femoral fractures. Meta analysis of ten randomized trials. Int Orthop 20:163–168PubMed
13.
Pervez H, Parker MJ (2001) Results of the long Gamma nail for complex proximal femoral fractures. Injury 32:70–77CrossRef
14.
Rantanen J, Aro HT (1998) Intramedullary fixation of high subrochanteric femoral fractures: a study comparing two implant designs, the Gamma nail and the intramedullary hip screw. J Orthop Trauma 12:29–52CrossRef
15.
Roberts CS, Nawab A, Wang M, Voor MJ, Seligson D (2002) Second generation intramedullary nailing of subtrochanteric femur fractures: a biomechanical study of fracture site motion. J Orthop Trauma 16:231–238CrossRefPubMed
16.
Valverde JA, Alonso MG, Porro JG, Rueda D, Larrauri PM, Soler JJ (1998) Use of the Gamma nail in the treatment of fractures of the proximal femur. Clin Orthop 350:56–61PubMed
17.
Van den Brink WA, Janssen IMC (1995) Failure of the Gamma nail in a highly unstable proximal fracture: report of four cases encountered in the Netherlands. J Orthop Trauma 9:53–56PubMed
18.
van Doorn R, Stapert JW (2000) The long gamma nail in the treatment of 329 subtrochanteric fractures with major extension into the femoral shaft. Eur J Surg 166:240–246CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Unstable subtrochanteric fractures—gamma nail versus dynamic condylar screw
Author
Andrés J. Pakuts
Publication date
01-02-2004
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
International Orthopaedics / Issue 1/2004
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-003-0497-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2004

International Orthopaedics 1/2004 Go to the issue

Original Paper

The femoral cement mantle in three total hip replacements

Original Paper

Functional comparison between uncemented Austin-Moore hemiarthroplasty and osteosynthesis with three screws in displaced femoral neck fractures—a matched-pair study of 168 patients

Original Paper

A study of patients with spinal disease using Maudsley Personality Inventory

Book Review

Ronald McRae: Clinical orthopaedic examination, 5th edn

Original Paper

Glove punctures in orthopaedic surgery

Original Paper

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in orthopaedic surgery