Early efficacy comparison of proximal femoral bionic nail and proximal femoral nail anti-rotation in the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture in the elderly
10.3760/cma.j.cn501098-20220711-00487
- VernacularTitle:股骨近端仿生髓内钉与股骨近端防旋髓内钉固定治疗老年股骨转子间骨折的早期疗效比较
- Author:
Dong LIN
1
;
Changqing CHEN
;
Sheng WANG
;
Changwei XIE
;
Zhongshuai GUO
;
Xinhua CUI
;
Ze ZHAO
Author Information
1. 河南理工大学第一附属医院骨科，焦作 454000
- Keywords:
Hip fractures;
Fracture fixation, internal;
Aged;
Proximal femoral bionic nail
- From:
Chinese Journal of Trauma
2022;38(11):1027-1035
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the early efficacy of proximal femoral bionic nail (PFBN) and proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) in the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture in the elderly.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was conducted to analyze the clinical data of 45 elderly patients with intertrochanteric fracture treated at First Affiliated Hospital of Henan Polytechnic University from March 2020 to December 2021, including 13 males and 32 females; aged 70-96 years [(78.6±7.3)years]. According to the AO classification, there were 10 patients with type 31-A1, 16 type 31-A2 and 19 type 31-A3. There were 20 patients treated with PFBN (PFBN group) and 25 with PFNA (PFNA group). The operation time, intraoperaive blood loss, bone healing time, and time to full weight-bearing were compared between the two groups. The tip-apex distance, distance from tail of lag screw to lateral side of intramedllary nail, proximal femoral length and femur neck-shaft angle were compared between the two groups at day 1 postoperatively and at the last follow-up, and their amount of changes between the two time points were also measured. Harris hip score was evaluated at 3, 6 months postoperatively and at the last follow-up. Complications were observed as well.Results:All patients were followed up for 6-21 months [(14.7±3.6)months]. There were no significant differences in operation time, intraoperative blood loss and bone healing time between the two groups (all P>0.05). The time to full weight-bearing was significantly earlier in PFBN group [(7.9±1.2)weeks] than that in PFNA group [(9.1±0.9)weeks] ( P<0.05). At day 1 postoperatively and at last follow-up, the tip-apex distance was (23.4±1.7)mm and (23.3±1.6)mm in PFBN group ( P>0.05), and was (24.5±2.1)mm and (24.3±2.3)mm in PFNA group ( P>0.05); the distance from tail of lag screw to lateral side of intramedllary nail was (8.1±1.1)mm and (11.8±0.9)mm in PFBN group ( P<0.01), and was (7.7±1.0)mm and (12.6±1.6)mm in PFNA group ( P<0.01); the proximal femoral length was (91.3±1.6)mm and (88.5±2.6)mm in PFBN group ( P<0.01), and was (91.4±2.0)mm and (87.6±2.0)mm in PFNA group ( P<0.01); the femur neck-shaft angle was (127.2±2.9)°and (125.7±3.0)° in PFBN group ( P>0.05), and was (128.5±3.0)° and (127.2±3.2)° in PFNA group ( P>0.05). There were no significant differences in the above indicators between the two groups at day 1 postoperatively and at the last follow-up (all P>0.05). The amount of changes in the tip-apex distance and femur neck-shaft angle were (-0.2±0.1)mm and (-1.6±0.7)° in PFBN group, similar with (-0.2±0.2)mm and (-1.5±1.0)° in PFNA group (all P>0.05). However, the amount of changes in the distance from tail of lag screw to lateral side of intramedllary nail and proximal femoral length were (3.6±1.4)mm and (2.7±1.2)mm in PFBN group, significantly lower than (5.2±1.1)mm and (4.0±1.1)mm in PFNA group (all P<0.01). There were no significant differences in Harris hip score between the two groups at 3, 6 months postoperatively or at the last follow-up (all P>0.05). PFBN group had 1 patient with fracture displacement, 2 with compression screw backup and 2 with thigh pain. PFNA group had 1 patient with fracture displacement and 4 with thigh pain. Conclusion:For elderly patients with intertrochanteric fracture, PFBN provides not only earlier full weight-bearing, but also stronger stability of fracture fixation than PFNA.
