Thusoo V, Nehru A, Kudyar S, Chakrapani AS, Saini ES, Alok KV, Narender D, Philip S. A Comparative Study of Dynamic Hip Screws and Proximal Femoral Nails in Intertrochanteric Fractures.
Cureus 2024;
16:e59063. [PMID:
38800311 PMCID:
PMC11128190 DOI:
10.7759/cureus.59063]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2024] [Accepted: 04/26/2024] [Indexed: 05/29/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Intertrochanteric fractures, which occur in the hip of older individuals due to the weak and brittle structure of the bone caused by osteoporosis, make up over 50% of all hip fractures. There are several treatment options available for these fractures. The major objective of this study was to carry out a comparative analysis to evaluate the efficacy of dynamic hip screws (DHS) and proximal femoral nails (PFN) in treating intertrochanteric fractures. Methodology Two hundred instances of intertrochanteric hip fractures were surgically treated between July 2022 and January 2024 at a tertiary care facility. The evaluation of fractures was conducted in two groups, namely, group 1, which consisted of 140 patients, each having a fracture in one hip, treated using the DHS method. Group 2 consisted of 60 patients, each having a fracture in one hip, treated using the PFN technique. The evaluation of functional results was performed with the Harris hip score. Results In the investigation within these groups, group 1 produced excellent outcomes in 53 patients, which accounts for 37.86% of the total. In group 2, the expected results were achieved in 34 patients (56.67%). Achieved outcomes were favorable in 75 (53.57%) individuals in group 1 and 21 (35%) in group 2. Out of the individuals in group 1, eight (5.71%) saw benefits, whereas four (1.6%) did not gain significantly. In group 2, five (8.33%) individuals benefitted. None of the patients in group 2 had unfavorable outcomes. Conclusion While both PFN and DHS provide comparable outcomes in stable bone, PFN demonstrated superior results in cases of unstable bone. The use of PFN results in reduced surgical duration and a smaller surgical opening. Additionally, PFN exhibited superior specificity compared to DHS, especially in cases with stable intertrochanteric bone.
Collapse