Functional outcomes of proximal femoral locking plate versus proximal femoral nail in subtrochanteric femur fractures

M. Mostafizur Rahman; Nabina Rahman; M. Moniruzzaman; S. M. Raqibul Hasan; Golam M. Chowdhury; S. M. Faisal Haque; S. M. Mainul Hassan; M. Ruhul A. Khan

doi:10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20254206

Authors

M. Mostafizur Rahman Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation (NITOR), Dhaka, Bangladesh
Nabina Rahman Department of Plastic Surgery, National Institute of Burn and Plastic Surgery, Dhaka, Bangladesh
M. Moniruzzaman Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Reha
S. M. Raqibul Hasan Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation (NITOR), Dhaka, Bangladesh
Golam M. Chowdhury Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, DNCC Dedicated COVID-19 Hospital, Mohakhali, Dhaka, Bangladesh
S. M. Faisal Haque Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation (NITOR), Dhaka, Bangladesh
S. M. Mainul Hassan Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation (NITOR), Dhaka, Bangladesh
M. Ruhul A. Khan Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Upazila Health Complex, Shakhipur, Tangail, Bangladesh

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20254206

Keywords:

Subtrochanteric femur fracture, Proximal femoral nail, Proximal femoral locking plate

Abstract

Background: Subtrochanteric femur fractures are difficult to manage because of strong deforming muscular forces and high rates of implant failure. Although several fixation devices are available, the optimal choice remains debated. This study compared the functional outcomes of proximal femoral locking plate (PFLP) and proximal femoral nail (PFN) in subtrochanteric femur fractures.

Methods: A prospective observational study was carried out at the National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation (NITOR), Dhaka, from September 2019 to March 2022. Forty-four patients were included, where 22 treated using PFLP and 22 with PFN. Demographic and clinical data were recorded. Outcomes were assessed by radiological union, limb length discrepancy (LLD), hip pain, range of motion (ROM), Harris hip score (HHS), and complication rates.

Results: Union occurred significantly earlier with PFN (13.5±3.2 weeks) than with PFLP (15.6±3.1 weeks; p=0.007). Mean LLD was lower in PFN (0.2±0.33 cm) than in PFLP (0.43±0.47 cm; p=0.0003). Pain-free status was more common in PFN patients (63.6%) compared with PFLP (31.8%). Hip ROM was similar in both groups. However, mean HHS was significantly higher in PFN at final follow-up (89.2±10.1 versus 83.6±12.9; p=0.04). Excellent outcomes were more frequent with PFN (51.9%) than with PFLP (36.4%). Complications were fewer in the PFN group.

Conclusion: PFN offers superior functional outcomes and fewer complications compared with PFLP, supporting PFN as the preferred implant for subtrochanteric femur fractures.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Panteli M, Giannoudi MP, Lodge CJ, West RM, Pountos I, Giannoudis PV. Mortality and medical complications of subtrochanteric fracture fixation. J Clin Med. 2021;10(3):540. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10030540

El-Sayed AS, El-Mowafi HM, Zalalo SH, Eid TA. Fixation of subtrochanteric fracture femur using a proximal femoral nail. Menoufia Med J. 2014;27(1):208-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/1110-2098.132811

Jiang L, Shen L, Dai L. Intramedullary fixation of subtrochanteric fractures with long proximal femoral nail or long gamma nail: technical notes and preliminary results. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2007;36(10):821. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.V36N10p821

Jackson C, Tanios M, Ebraheim N. Management of subtrochanteric proximal femur fractures: a review of recent literature. Adv Orthop. 2018;2018(1):1326701. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/1326701

Ng AC, Drake MT, Clarke BL, Sems SA, Atkinson EJ, Achenbach SJ, Melton III LJ. Trends in subtrochanteric, diaphyseal, and distal femur fractures, 1984–2007. Osteoporos Int. 2012;23(6):1721-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-011-1777-9

Nieves JW, Bilezikian JP, Lane JM, Einhorn TA, Wang Y, Steinbuch M, et al. Fragility fractures of the hip and femur: incidence and patient characteristics. Osteoporos Int. 2010;21(3):399-408. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-009-0962-6

Dobbs RE, Parvizi J, Lewallen DG. Perioperative morbidity and 30-day mortality after intertrochanteric hip fractures treated by internal fixation or arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20(8):963-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2005.04.035

Burnei C, Popescu GH, Barbu D, Capraru F. Intramedullary osteosynthesis versus plate osteosynthesis in subtrochanteric fractures. J Med Life. 2011;4(4):324.

Streubel PN, Moustoukas MJ, Obremskey WT. Mechanical failure after locking plate fixation of unstable intertrochanteric femur fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2013;27(1):22-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e318251930d

Simmermacher RK, Bosch AM, Van der Werken CH. The AO/ASIF-proximal femoral nail (PFN): a new device for the treatment of unstable proximal femoral fractures. Injury. 1999;30(5):327-32.

Kanthimathi B, Narayanan VL. Early complications in proximal femoral nailing done for treatment of subtrochanteric fractures. Malays Orthop J. 2012;6(1):25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5704/MOJ.1203.009

Kumar DY, Harshwardhan DH. Comparison of proximal femur locking compression plate and proximal femur nail in treatment of complex proximal femoral fractures. Int J Orthop Sci. 2018;4(2c):164-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22271/ortho.2018.v4.i2c.26

Pradhan V, Jain S, Agrawal S, Sharma SL. Comparative prospective study of proximal femoral nail and locking compression plate in subtrochanteric fractures of femur. Natl J Clin Orthop. 2018;2(4):188-94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33545/orthor.2018.v2.i4c.94

Roy S, Banik R. A comparative study between proximal femoral nail and proximal femoral locking plate in subtrochanteric femoral fractures: A prospective analysis of 36 cases. Int J Orthop. 2019;5(3):815-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22271/ortho.2019.v5.i3n.1632

Curtis MJ, Jinnah RH, Wilson V, Cunningham BW. Proximal femoral fractures: a biomechanical study to compare intramedullary and extramedullary fixation. Injury. 1994;25(2):99-104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-1383(94)90111-2

Mirbolook A, Siavashi B, Jafarinezhad AE, Khajeh Jahromi S, Farahmand M, Roohi Rad M, et al. Subtrochanteric fractures: comparison of proximal femur locking plate and intramedullary locking nail fixation outcome. Indian J Surg. 2015;77:795-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-013-1004-3

Nirup NC, Reddy VN. A prospective comparative study of subtrochanteric fractures treated with long proximal femur nail and proximal femur locking plate. Int J Sci Res. 2019;8(9):62-5.

Vinay N, Sain A. Comparative evaluation of clinico-radiological and functional outcome of proximal femoral locking compression plate and proximal femoral nail in unstable proximal femoral fractures. Int J Orthop Sci. 2016;2:103-7.

Simmermacher RK, Bosch AM, Van der Werken CH. The AO/ASIF-proximal femoral nail (PFN): a new device for the treatment of unstable proximal femoral fractures. Injury. 1999;30(5):327-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-1383(99)00091-1

Pisoude K, Elahifar O, Sohrabi MB, Khajemozafari J. Comparison of proximal femur locking compression plate and intramedullary nailing in the treatment of sub-trochanteric fractures. J Res Orthop Sci. 2019;6(2):1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5812/soj.91166