Use of femoral nail with spiral blade in subtrochanteric fractures
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of acute subtrochanteric fractures managed with intramedullary nail and spiral blade fixation of the proximal fragment. Methods: Charts of 33 patients (17 males and 16 females) with acute subtrochanteric fractures operated with intramedullary nail and spiral blade at our institution between March 2006 and February 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. The most common (67%) mechanism of injury was ground-level fall, predominantly involving elderly patients. Results were evaluated in terms of union time, implant failure rate, infection rate and functional outcome. Results: Mean duration of surgery was 2.4 hours and average length of hospital stay was 7 days. Mean radiological healing time was 16 weeks. Good healing occurred in 31 (94%) patients within 6 months of surgery. Uneventful healing occurred in 28 (85%) patients and 3 (9%) had delayed healing requiring dynamization in two patients and bone grafting in one. Implant failure occurred in 2 (6%) patients within 2 months of index surgery requiring repeat surgery. One (3%) patient had varus malunion. Conclusion: Intramedullary nailing with spiral blade is a good option for acute subtrochanteric fractures with promising results. We think that this is a superior device compared to conventional methods of fixation for subtrochanteric fractures.
___
1. Lavelle DG. Campbells operative orthopaedics. 10th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2003. p. 2897.2. Wheeler DL, Croy TJ, Woll TS, Scott MD, Senft DC, Duwelius PJ. Comparison of reconstruction nails for high subtrochanteric femur fracture fixation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997;338:231-9.
3. Sims SH. Subtrochanteric femur fractures. Orthop Clin North Am 2002;33:113-26
4. Craig NJ, Maffulli N. Subtrochanteric fractures: current management options. Disabil Rehabil 2005;27:1181-90.
5. Halwai MA, Dhar SA, Wani MI, Butt MF, Mir BA, Ali MF, et al. The dynamic condylar screw in the management of subtrochanteric fractures: does judicious use of biological fixation enhance overall results? Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2007;2:77-81.
6. Miclau T, Martin RE. The evolution of modern plate osteosynthesis. Injury 1997;28 Suppl 1:A3-6.
7. Bedi A, Toan Le T. Subtrochanteric femur fractures. Orthop Clin North Am 2004;35:473-83.
8. DeLee JC, Clanton TO, Rockwood CA Jr. Closed treatment of subtrochanteric fractures of the femur in a modified cast-brace. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1981;63:773-9.
9. Tencer AF, Johnson KD, Johnston DW, Gill K. A biomechanical comparison of various methods of stabilization of subtrochanteric fractures of the femur. J Orthop Res 1984;2:297-305.
10. Jiang LS, Shen L, Dai LY. Intramedullary fixation of subtrochanteric fractures with long proximal femoral nail or long gamma nail: technical notes and preliminary results. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2007;36:821-6.
11. Vaidya SV, Dholakia DB, Chatterjee A. The use of a dynamic condylar screw and biological reduction techniques for subtrochanteric femur fracture. Injury 2003;34:123-8.
12. Siebenrock KA, Müller U, Ganz R. Indirect reduction with a condylar blade plate for osteosynthesis of subtrochanteric femoral fractures. Injury 1998;29 Suppl 3:C7- 15.
13. Hoffmann R, Südkamp NP, Müller CA, Schütz M, Haas NP. Osteosynthesis of proximal femoral fractures with the modular interlocking system of unreamed AO femoral intramedullary nail. Initial clinical results. [Article in German] Unfallchirurg 1994;97:568-74. [Abstract]
14. Broos PL, Reynders P. The use of the unreamed AO femoral intramedullary nail with spiral blade in nonpathologic fractures of the femur: experiences with eighty consecutive cases. J Orthop Trauma 2002;16:150-4.
15. Vanderschot P, Vanderspeeten K, Verheyen L, Broos P. A review on 161 subtrochanteric fractures--risk factors influencing outcome: age, fracture pattern and fracture level. Unfallchirurg 1995;98:265-71.
16. Warwick DJ, Crichlow TP, Langkamer VG, Jackson M. The dynamic condylar screw in the management of subtrochanteric fractures of the femur. Injury 1995;26:241-4.
17. Saarenpää I, Heikkinen T, Jalovaara P. Treatment of subtrochanteric fractures. A comparison of the Gamma nail and the dynamic hip screw: short-term outcome in 58 patients. Int Orthop 2007;31:65-70.
18. Datir SP, Bedi GS, Curwen CH. Unreamed femoral nail with spiral blade in subtrochanteric fractures: experience of 55 cases. Injury 2004;35:191-5.
19. Brumback RJ, Uwagie-Ero S, Lakatos RP, Poka A, Bathon GH, Burgess AR. Intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures. Part II: Fracture-healing with static interlocking fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1988;70:1453-62.
20. Stockenhuber N, Schweighofer F, Bratschitsch G, Szyszkowitz R. UFN system. A method of minimal invasive surgical management of femoral shaft fractures. Langenbecks Arch Chir 1996;381:267-74.
21. Stover MD, Lin I, Bosse MJ. Removal of a broken Synthes proximal spiral blade. J Orthop Trauma 1998;12:190-1.
- ISSN: 1017-995X
- Başlangıç: 2015
- Yayıncı: Türk Ortopedi ve Travmatoloji Derneği
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler
MEHMET SERHAN ER, Elif Cihan ALTINEL, Levent ALTINEL, Recep Abdullah ERTEN, Mehmet EROĞLU
Association between attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder and Perthes disease
İsmail TÜRKMEN, Oğuz POYANLI, Koray ÜNAY, Bahattin KEMAH, Kaya AKAN, Semra ULUSAN
NİHAL BÜKER, Semih AKKAYA, OĞUZHAN GÖKALP, Ali KİTİŞ, RAZİYE ŞAVKIN, A. Esat KITER
Relationship between range of motion and femoral rollback in total knee arthroplasty
Lúcio Honório de CARVALHO Jr., Eduardo Frois TEMPONI, Luiz Fernando Machado SOARES, Matheus Jacques Braga GONÇALVES
Ayşin YEŞİLADA KARASOY, Serdar Bora BAYRAKTAROĞLU, Kamuran Zeynep SEVİM, Damlanur SAKIZ, H. Soner TATLIDEDE
Effects of two different solutions used in pin site care on the development of infection
RAHŞAN ÇAM, Fatma KORKMAZ DEMİR, Şevki ŞAVK ÖNER
Serhat MUTLU, OLCAY GÜLER, Adem UÇAR, Mahir MAHİROĞULLARI
Esat KITER, Ertan ER, Nilay TÜRK ŞEN, Murat OTO, Semih AKKAYA
SEVTAP GÜNAY UÇURUM, AYNUR AYŞE KARADUMAN, Burcu Bahar ÖZTÜRK