Key result
Proximal Femoral Nail (PFN) resulted in shorter surgery duration (97 vs 111 min) and better functional outcomes compared to Dynamic Hip Screw in type 31-A2 intertrochanteric fractures.
Why the study?
Intertrochanteric fractures are common in the elderly, and this study aimed to compare the functional and radiological outcomes of proximal femoral nail versus dynamic hip screw for type 31-A2 fractures.
Does Proximal Femoral Nail improve functional and radiological outcomes compared to Dynamic Hip Screw in patients with type 31-A2 intertrochanteric fractures?
RCT (n=162)
randomized
Does Proximal Femoral Nail improve functional and radiological outcomes compared to Dynamic Hip Screw in patients with type 31-A2 intertrochanteric fractures?
Proximal Femoral Nail provides better functional outcomes, shorter surgery duration, and fewer complications than Dynamic Hip Screw for type 31-A2 intertrochanteric fractures.
PFN may yield shorter operative time and fewer complications than DHS in 31-A2 fractures; leaves open need for confirmatory RCTs.
Background: Intertrochanteric fracture is one of the most common fractures of the hip, especially in the elderly with osteoporotic bones, usually due to low-energy trauma like simple falls. This study was done to compare the functional and radiological outcome of PFN with dynamic hip screw (DHS) in treatment of type 31-A2, intertrochanteric fractures. Materials and Methods: From June 2019 to June 2021, prospective randomized and comparative study was conducted on the 162 patients of type 31-A2 intertrochanteric fractures of hip who were operated using PFN or DHS. Intraoperative complications were noted. Functional outcome was assessed using Harris hip score (HHS) and radiological findings were compared at 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Results: In our study, out of 162 patients, 77 patients are managed with DHS, while 85 patients are managed with PFN. The average age group of the patients was 61–70 years. In our series, we found that patients with DHS had longer duration of surgery (111 min) and required longer time for mobilization, while patients who underwent PFN had shorter duration of surgery (97 min) and allowed early mobilization. In addition, complications such as DVT, lag screw cutout, shortening, and superficial infection are more in DHS group as compared to PFN group. The patients treated with PFN started early ambulation as they had better HHS in the early postoperative period as well as late postoperative period. Conclusion: PFN is better than DHS in type 31-A2 intertrochanteric fractures in terms of decreased blood loss, reduced duration of surgery, early weight-bearing and mobilization, reduced hospital stay, decreased risk of infection, and decreased complications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shukla et al. (2022) conducted an RCT in Type 31-A2 intertrochanteric fractures (n=162). Proximal Femoral Nail (PFN) vs. Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) was evaluated on Functional outcome (Harris hip score) and radiological findings. Proximal Femoral Nail (PFN) resulted in shorter surgery duration (97 vs 111 min) and better functional outcomes compared to Dynamic Hip Screw in type 31-A2 intertrochanteric fractures.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: