Comparative study of functional outcome of inter-trochanteric fractures in adult population treated with modified first generation proximal femoral nail versus second generation proximal femoral nail- PFN-A2

Bhuban Mohan Pal; Malay Kumar Mandal; Swagatam Jash; Nilargha Bhattacharyya; Sarba Halder; Jishnu Chatterjee; Sakil Malik

doi:10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20251799

Authors

Bhuban Mohan Pal Department of Orthopedics, KPC Medical College and Hospital, Jadavpur, Kolkata, West Bengal, India https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1514-0739
Malay Kumar Mandal Department of Orthopedics, KPC Medical College and Hospital, Jadavpur, Kolkata, West Bengal, India https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3101-2920
Swagatam Jash Department of Orthopedics, KPC Medical College and Hospital, Jadavpur, Kolkata, West Bengal, India https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4525-8526
Nilargha Bhattacharyya Department of Orthopedics, KPC Medical College and Hospital, Jadavpur, Kolkata, West Bengal, India https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8682-1116
Sarba Halder Department of Orthopedics, KPC Medical College and Hospital, Jadavpur, Kolkata, West Bengal, India https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5582-5935
Jishnu Chatterjee Department of Orthopedics, KPC Medical College and Hospital, Jadavpur, Kolkata, West Bengal, India https://orcid.org/0009-0002-8803-6712
Sakil Malik Department of Orthopedics, Manipal Hospitals Salt Lake, Kolkata, West Bengal, India https://orcid.org/0009-0002-1058-9480

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20251799

Keywords:

Harris hip score, Inter-trochanteric fracture, PFN, PFNA2

Abstract

Background: Intertrochanteric fractures are fairly prevalent in elderly, owing to osteoporosis. High velocity trauma is a common cause in younger age groups. Surgical fixation is the choice of treatment. Closed reduction being minimally invasive has lower infection rates and higher union rate. Providing early mobility lowers morbidity. Over time, there have been multiple changes in the implant design. Two screws in femoral head are used in the first generation PFN, compared to a single helical bolt in the subsequent modification i.e. PFNA2.

Methods: Prospective and comparative study was undertaken, from January 2023 to June 2024, including 52 adults (17 males and 35 females) of either sex, with intertrochanteric fracture femur. 26 patients underwent first generation PFN (group A) and 26 underwent PFNA2 (group B). Clinico-radiological evaluation was done at 6 weeks, 3-, 6- and 12-months following surgery. Functional evaluation was based on the mean Harris hip score (HHS). Post-operative pain based on VAS, early mobilization and complications were taken into consideration. Statistics was analysed with Statistical Package for The Social Sciences (IBM SPSS version 22).

Results: There was 100% union rate. The average date of mobilization in group A patient was 1.9±0.8 days and in group B was 2.2±0.7 days. Group A has a statistically significant higher VAS score than group B at 24 hours post-surgery. Weight bearing as tolerated was started on day 1 post surgery in all patients. The mean HHS was significantly higher in group B (71.5±3.8) at 6 weeks follow-up, which on subsequent follow-ups was statistically insignificantly between the two groups. None of the patients had implant failure of any form.

Conclusions: The final outcome was statistically insignificant. There was negligible difference between the first generation PFN and PFNA2 in terms of post-operative stability and fracture union. Hence, both PFN and PFNA2 are equally suitable devices for fixation of inter-trochanteric fracture.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Haidukewych GJ. Intertrochanteric fractures: ten tips to improve results. J Bone Joint Surg. 2009;91(3):712-9.

Kaplan K, Miyamoto R, Levine BR, Egol KA, Zuckerman JD. Surgical management of hip fractures: an evidence-based review of the literature. II: intertrochanteric fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008;16(11):665-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5435/00124635-200811000-00007

Haidukewych GJ. Intertrochanteric fractures: ten tips to improve results. Instruct Course Lect. 2010;59:503-9.

Socci AR, Casemyr NE, Leslie MP, Baumgaertner MR. Implant options for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures of the hip: rationale, evidence, and recommendations. Bone Joint J. 2017;99(1):128-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.99B1.BJJ-2016-0134.R1

Sonawane DV. Classifications of intertrochanteric fractures and their clinical importance. Trauma Int. 2015;1(1):7-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13107/ti.2015.v01i01.003

Adeyemi A, Delhougne G. Incidence and economic burden of intertrochanteric fracture: a Medicare claims database analysis. J Bone Joint Surg. 2019;4(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.18.00045

Herman A, Landau Y, Gutman G, Ougortsin V, Chechick A, Shazar N. Radiological evaluation of intertrochanteric fracture fixation by the proximal femoral nail. Injury. 2012;43(6):856-63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2011.10.030

Yu J, Zhang C, Li L, Kwong JS, Xue L, Zeng X, et al. Internal fixation treatments for intertrochanteric fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized evidence. Sci Rep. 2015;5(1):18195. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep18195

Sidhu AS, Singh AP, Singh AP, Singh S. Total hip replacement as primary treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients. Int Orthop. 2010;34:789-92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-009-0826-x

Loo WL, Loh SY, Lee HC. Review of proximal nail antirotation (PFNA) and PFNA-2–our local experience. Malay Orthop J. 2011;5(2):1-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5704/MOJ.1107.001

Li M, Wu L, Liu Y, Wang C. Clinical evaluation of the Asian proximal femur intramedullary nail antirotation system (PFNA-II) for treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. J Orthop Surg Res. 2014;9(1):1-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-014-0112-5

Kumar U. India’s demographic transition: boon or bane? Asia Pac Policy Stud. 2014;1(1):186-203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.9

Sahu R. Demographic transition in India: Issues and concerns. Handbook of Research on Multicultural Perspectives on Gender and Aging. New Delhi: IGI Global; 2018:117-125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-4772-3.ch009

Wyatt M, Freeman C, Beck M. Anatomy of the Hip Joint. In: Fractures of the Hip. Springer International Publishing; 2019:1-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18838-2_1

Harty M. The anatomy of the hip joint. Surgery of the Hip Joint. New York, NY: Springer New York; 1984:45-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-5224-5_3

Bazira PJ. Clinically applied anatomy of the pelvis. Surgery (Oxford). 2024:1-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpsur.2024.03.008

Santharam B, Mohammed KF, Ratnam S, Madhav A. A comparative study of intertrochanteric fractures of hip treated with PFN and PFNA 2. Indian J Orthop Surg. 2019;5:896-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22271/ortho.2019.v5.i4p.1793

Mandal DM, Kumar DR, Kumar D, Singh DV, Kumar N, Chaudhary R. Comparative study of PFN versus PFNA 2 in intertrochanteric fractures: a randomised control trial. Int J Orthop Sci. 2020;6(4):461-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22271/ortho.2020.v6.i4g.2373

Jamshad OP, Mathew J, Karuppal R. Functional and radiological outcome of unstable intertrochanteric fracture in old age treated with proximal femoral nail antirotation-2. J Clin Diagn Res. 2021;15(4). DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2021/47653.14751

Kumar A. Functional and radiological outcome of intertrochanteric fractures of the femur treated with proximal femoral nail antirotation II. Int J Life Sci Biotech Pharm Res. 2023;12(1):454-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/ijsm.136-1665213796

Kothiyal P, Vij K, Gupta P, Sharma S. A comparative study of intertan nail versus proximal femoral nail antirotation in the treatment of peritrochanteric fractures. Int J Res Orthop. 2022;8(6):686. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20222708

Sharma A, Mahajan A, John B. A comparison of the clinico-radiological outcomes with proximal femoral nail (PFN) and proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) in fixation of unstable intertrochanteric fractures. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11(7):RC05-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2017/28492.10181

Tanner DA, Kloseck M, Crilly RG, Chesworth B, Gilliland J. Hip fracture types in men and women change differently with age. BMC Geriatr. 2010;10:1-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2318-10-12

Mukherjee J, Ahmad M, Jash S, Nasipuri K, Kushwaha PK. Functional outcome of peritrochanteric fracture fixation with modified gamma nail using tri-wire anchorage. Int J Res Orthop. 2022;8:177-82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20220604

Mini GK, Thankappan KR. Pattern, correlates and implications of non-communicable disease multimorbidity among older adults in selected Indian states: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2017;7(3):e013529. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013529

Kaur G, Bansal R, Anand T, Kumar A, Singh J. Morbidity profile of noncommunicable diseases among elderly in a city in North India. Clin Epidemiol Glob Health. 2019;7(1):29-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cegh.2017.12.004

Ma KL, Wang X, Luan FJ, Xu HT, Fang Y, Min J, et al. Proximal femoral nails antirotation, Gamma nails, and dynamic hip screws for fixation of intertrochanteric fractures of femur: a meta-analysis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2014;100(8):859-66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2014.07.023

Gadhe SS, Bhor P, Ibad Patel DA, Vatkar DS, Kanade G. Comparative study of PFNA versus PFNA 2 in unstable intertrochanteric fractures: a randomised control study of 50 cases. Int J Orthop. 2019;5(3):162-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22271/ortho.2019.v5.i3c.1525

Morrison RS, Magaziner J, McLaughlin MA, Orosz G, Silberzweig SB, Koval KJ, et al. The impact of post-operative pain on outcomes following hip fracture. Pain. 2003;103(3):303-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3959(02)00458-X

Simunovic N, Devereaux PJ, Sprague S, Guyatt GH, Schemitsch E, DeBeer J, et al. Effect of early surgery after hip fracture on mortality and complications: systematic review and meta-analysis. Can Med Assoc J. 2010;182(15):1609-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.092220

Haller JM, Potter MQ, Kubiak EN. Weight bearing after a periarticular fracture: what is the evidence? Orthop Clin. 2013;44(4):509-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2013.06.005