Choosing an optimal implant fixation for basicervical femoral neck fractures

Cephalomedullary Nailing versus Dynamic Hip Screw Fixation in Basicervical Femoral Neck Fracture: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Although many studies have reported the use of dynamic hip screws (DHS) and cephalomedullary nailing (CMN) for basicervical femoral neck fracture (BFNF), no clear treatment protocols have been recommended. The present study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes associated with DHS and CMN to determine the appropriate fixation method for BFNF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies published up to January 9, 2021 that compared the treatment outcomes between CMN and DHS in BFNF. The primary outcomes of the present meta-analysis were fracture union time, postoperative cut-out rate, and reoperation rate.

RESULTS

We included seven studies involving 353 cases of BFNF in our review. Of these, 206 patients were treated using CMN, and DHS were utilized in 147 patients. In a pooled analysis, the DHS group required a longer time to achieve fracture union compared to the CMN group [mean difference (MD): -0.41; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.70, -0.12; p=0.006; I²=0%]. However, the cut-out and reoperation rates exhibited no statistically significant differences between the DHS and CMN groups [cut-out odds ratio (OR): 0.54; 95% CI: 0.10, 2.82; p=0.47; I²=24%, reoperation rate OR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.15, 2.86; p=0.57; I²=19%, respectively].

CONCLUSION

Stable fixation using DHS and CMN does not show a significant clinical or radiographical difference in BFNF, and the implant can be selected based on the surgeon's preference.

[Effectiveness of proximal femoral nail anti-rotation for high plane intertrochanteric femur fractures]

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) in treatment of high plane intertrochanteric femur fractures.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on 33 patients who underwent closed reduction and PFNA fixation for high plane intertrochanteric femur fracture between January 2016 and June 2019. There were 12 males and 21 females with an average age of 75.1 years (mean, 47-89 years). The fractures were caused by falling from height in 21 cases, by traffic accident in 7 cases, and by other injuries in 5 cases. Fractures were classified as type A in 14 cases and type B in 19 cases according to self-defined fracture classification criteria; and as type 31-A1.2 in 14 cases and as type 31-A2.2 in 19 cases according to AO/Orthopedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) classification criteria. The time from injury to operation was 2-5 days (mean, 2.7 days). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, fracture reduction quality, fracture healing time, internal fixation failure, and Parker-Palmer score were recorded.

Results

The operation time was 40-75 minutes (mean, 55 minutes). The intraoperative blood loss was 50-150 mL (mean, 64 mL). The hospital stay was 5-15 days (mean, 8.7 days). All incisions healed by first intention. Twenty-eight patients were followed up 12-18 months with an average of 13.6 months. The fracture reduction quality was rated as excellent in 9 cases (32.1%), good in 17 cases (60.7%), and poor in 2 cases (7.1%) by Chang's criteria. Parker-Palmer score was 6-9 (mean, 7.9) at last follow-up.

Conclusion

High plane intertrochanteric femur fracture is a special type of intertrochanteric fracture, which can be diagnosed by imaging examination. PFNA fixation can achieve satisfactory results and prevent the occurrence of internal fixation failure effectively.

[Concept evolution and research progress of stability reconstruction for intertrochanteric fracture]

Objective

To summarize the evolving concept and research progress on stability reconstruction in the surgical treatment of intertrochanteric fracture.

Methods

Related literature and author's own experience concerning the surgical treatment of intertrochanteric fracture were reviewed and analyzed in terms of fracture pathoanatomy, stable and unstable pattern, adequate and in-adequate reduction, primary and secondary stability, postoperative stability evaluation, and early weight-bearing.

Results

Intertrochanteric fracture occur at the translational area of cervico-trochanteric junction, which has a nature tendency to varus instability. Fracture reduction quality is the paramount factor and is evaluated by two views, the anteroposterior and lateral Garden alignment and cortex apposition between the head-neck fragment and the femoral shaft. Rather than the posteromedial lesser trochanteric frag ment, the cortical support concept (positive, neutral, negative) emphasizes the reduction of anteromedial cortex to a nonanatomic positive apposition or an "anatomic" neutral apposition in intraoperative fluoroscopy. Postoperative radiographic stability score provides a quantitative assessment for early weight-bearing standing and walking. However, some fractures may lose cortical contact and buttress (negative) during the process of postoperative telescoping and secondary stability. Further studies are needed to elucidate the risk factors such as tilting, swing or rotation of the head-neck fragment, and propose new preventive methods.

Conclusion

Stability reconstruction of intertrochanteric fracture requires adequate fracture reduction with Garden alignment and anteromedial cortical support apposition, and reliable sustainment by internal fixation implants. Early weight-bearing standing and walking is safe in patients with perfect postoperative stability score.