A study of functional outcome of intertrochanteric fractures  operated with intraheal proximal hip stabilizing nail-multicentric study

Sumit Chawla; Parikshat Gopal; Amit Gupta; Akhil Pasupuleti; Varun Radhakrishnan; Mallika Gupta

doi:10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20243119

Authors

Sumit Chawla Department of Orthopaedics, Maharaja Agarsen Hospital, Delhi, India
Parikshat Gopal Department of Orthopaedics, KK Hospital, Delhi, India
Amit Gupta Jaipur Golden Hospital, Delhi, India
Akhil Pasupuleti Department of Orthopaedics, Maharaja Agarsen Hospital, Delhi, India
Varun Radhakrishnan Department of Orthopaedics, Maharaja Agarsen Hospital, Delhi, India
Mallika Gupta Department of Radiology, Pentamed Hospital, Delhi, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20243119

Keywords:

Intertrochanteric fracture, PHSN, Trauma, Elderly

Abstract

Background: Modalities of fixation in intertrochanteric fractures have been a topic of debate since times immemorial. Our special aims at comparing the functional outcome of Intraheal™ proximal hip stabilizing nail (PHSN, GPC Medical Limited) fixation in 200 patients of intertrochanteric fractures.

Methods: 200 patients of intertrochanteric fracture fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included in our study. Preoperative AP and Lateral views of hip joint were taken for all patients. In post-operative period, the patients were reviewed at 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months by the operating surgeon. Functional assessment, radiological assessment of bony union and complications were evaluated in follow up period.

Results: 200 patients underwent Intraheal™ proximal hip stabilizing nail fixation. They were followed-up the patients at 2 weeks, 1, 3, 6 and at 12 months postoperatively AP and lateral pelvic X-rays were obtained at each follow-up, and implant position changes, all complications, and fixation failures were recorded. We included a total of 200 patients meeting the criteria in this study and follow up was done till 12 months postoperatively. Intra-operative complications, time of hospital stay, Varus fixation and fracture displacement were assessed.

Conclusion: Advantages noted with PHSN fixation were excellent Harris hip score, lesser screw cutout, early union rate. However, PHSN had greater incidence of anterior thigh pain at all intervals of follow-up. There were no significant local wound complications or duration of hospital stay.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Papasimos S, Koutsojannis CM, PanagopoulosA, Megas P, Lambiris E. A randomised comparison of AMBI, TGN and PFN fortreatment of unstable trochanteric fractures. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surg. 2005;125(7):462-68.

Haynes RC, Pöll RG, Miles AW, Weston RB. Failure of femoral head fixation: a cadaveric. 1997.

analysis of lag screw cut-out with the gamma locking nail and AO dynamic hip screw. Injury. 1997;28(5-6):337-41.

Butt MS, Krikler SJ, Nafie S, Ali MS. Comparison of dynamic hip screw and gamma nail: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Injury. 1995;26(9):615-8.

Kubiak EN, Bong M, Park SS, Kummer F, Egol K, Koval KJ. Intramedullary fixation of unstable intertrochanteric hip fractures: one or two lagscrews. J Ortho T. 2004;18(1):12-7.

Boldin C, Seibert FJ, Fankhauser F, Peicha G, Grechenig W, Szyszkowitz R. The proximal femoral nail (PFN)-a minimal invasive treatment of unstable proximal femoralfractures: a prospective study of 55 patients with a follow-up of 15 months. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica. 2003;74(1):53-8.

Tyllianakis M, Panagopoulos A, PapadopoulosA, Papasimos S, Mousafiris K. Treatment of extracapsular hip fractures with the proximalfemoral nail (PFN): long term results in 45 patients. Acta orthopaedica belgica. 2004;70(5):444-54.

Al-Yassari G, Langstaff RJ, Jones JW, Al-Lami M.The AO/ASIF proximal femoral nail (PFN) for9the treatment of unstable trochanteric femoralfracture. Injury. 2002;33(5):395-99.

Huang ZY, Liu XW, Su JC. Dynamic hip screwvs. proximal femur nail in treatment of intertrochanteric fractures in patients age dover 70 years old. Shanghai Med J.2010;33(11):1042.

Pavelka T, Matejka J, Cervenkova H. Complications of internal fixation by a short proximal femoral nail. Acta chirurgiae orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Cechoslovaca. 2005;72(6): 344-54.

Matre K, Vinje T, Havelin LI, Gjertsen JE,Furnes O, Espehaug B, Kjellevold SH, Fevang JM. TRIGEN INTERTAN intramedullary nail versus sliding hip screw: a prospective, randomized multi-center study on pain, function, and complications in 684 patients with an intertrochanteric or sub trochanteric fracture and one year of follow-up. JBJS. 2013;95(3):200-8.

Mereddy P, Kamath S, Ramakrishnan M, Malik H, Donnachie N. The AO/ASIF proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA): a new design for the treatment of unstable proximal femoral fractures. Injury. 2009; 40(4):428-32.

Chawla S, Gupta M, Grover V, Garima. Functional and clinical evaluation of intramedullary osteosynthesis with Intraheal™ proximal femoral nail, advanced in unstable peri trochanteric fractures. Int J Orthop Sci. 2021;7(4):92-6.

Ruecker AH, Rupprecht M, Gruber M, GebauerM, Barvencik F, Briem D, Rueger JM. The treatment of intertrochanteric fractures: results using an intramedullary nail with integrated cephalocervical screws and linearcompression. J Ortho Tra. 2009;23(1):22-30.

Qin H, An Z. Therapeutic evaluation of femoral intertro chanteric fractures by Inter Tan. Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi=Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi. Chinese J Reparative andre constructive Surg. 2010;24(12):1424-7.

Butler M, Forte ML, Joglekar SB, SwiontkowskiMF, Kane RL. Evidence summary: systematic review of surgical treatments for geriatric hipfractures. J Bone and Joint Surg. 2011;93(12): 1104-15.

Bhandari M, Schemitsch E, Jönsson A,Zlowodzki M, Haidukewych GJ. Gamma nails revisited: gamma nails versus compression hip screws in the management of intertro chanteric fractures of the hip: a meta-analysis. J Orthop Tra. 2009;23(6):460-4.

Parker MJ, Handoll HH. Gamma and other cephalon condylic intramedullary nails versus extramedullary implants for extracapsular hipfractures in adults. The Cochrane Library.2010;8:45-9.

Albareda J, Laderiga A, Palanca D, Paniagua L, Seral F. Complications and technical problems with the gamma nail. International Orthopaedics. 1996;20(1): 47-50.

Parker MJ, Pryor GA. Gamma versus DHS nailing for extracapsular femoral fractures. International Orthopaedics. 1996;20(3):163-8.

Vaquero J, Munoz J, Prat S, Ramirez C, Aguado HJ, Moreno E, Perez MD. Proximal femoral nail antirotation versus gamma3 nail for intramedullary nailing of unstable trochanteric fractures. A randomised comparative study. Injury. 2012;43:47-54.

Ballal MS, Emms N, Ramakrishnan M, ThomasG. Proximal femoral nail failures in extracapsular fractures of the hip. J Orthop Surg. 2008;16(2):146-9.

Min WK, Kim SY, Kim TK, Lee KB, Cho MR, HaYC, Koo KH. Proximal femoral nail for the treatment of reverse obliquity intertro chanteric fractures compared with gamma nail. J Tra Acute Care Surg. 2007;63(5):1054-60.

Yu W, Zhang X, Zhu X, Hu J, Liu Y. Aretrospective analysis of the Inter Tan nail and proximal femoral nail anti-rotation-Asia in the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric femur fractures in the elderly. J Ortho Surg Res. 2016;11(1):10.