Key result
Cementing the cervicocephalic blade during proximal femoral nail osteosynthesis in patients over 90 years old did not significantly reduce the rate of osteosynthesis disassembly compared to uncemented nails (4.35% vs 6.25%, p=1).
Why the study?
Early verticalisation for pertrochanteric fractures in the very elderly requires stable osteosynthesis, but the value of cementing the cervicocephalic blade during proximal femoral nailing remains to be analysed.
Does cementing the cervicocephalic blade during PFNA osteosynthesis reduce disassembly and improve functional outcomes in patients over 90 years of age with pertrochanteric fractures?
Cohort (n=87)
Yes
Does cementing the cervicocephalic blade during PFNA osteosynthesis reduce disassembly and improve functional outcomes in patients over 90 years of age with pertrochanteric fractures?
Odds Ratio: 1.46 (95% CI 0.13–75.44)
Absolute Event Rate: 4.35% vs 6.25%
p-value: p=1
Cementing the cervicocephalic blade during PFNA osteosynthesis in patients over 90 with pertrochanteric fractures significantly improves early walking recovery without increasing the risk of mechanical failure.
The management of pertrochanteric fractures (PTF) in the very elderly relies on early verticalisation to limit complications of the decubitus and this requires stable osteosynthesis allowing immediate full support without risk of mechanical failure. The aim of the study was to analyse the value of cementing the cervicocephalic blade during osteosynthesis with a proximal femoral nail. A prospective bicentric comparative study was con- ducted. Patients over 90 years of age with PTF were included. Centre A used a PFNA (Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation) nail without blade cementing and Centre B used the same nail with blade cementing. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of disassembly of the osteosynthesis requiring revision surgery. Secondary endpoints were functional out- come (resumption of walking), postoperative pain and duration of surgery. Sixty-four patients were included in Centre A and 23 patients were included in Centre B. Mean age, gender, functional abilities before fracture, fracture type and tip-apex distance were comparable between the groups. Postoperative pain and duration of surgery did not show significant differences between the groups. Four patients operated on with an uncemented PFNA (6.25%) and one patient operated on with a cemented PFNA nail (4.35%) showed early dismantling. The rate of patients returning to walking was significantly higher in the cemented group (p=0.00005). No significant differences in the rate of dismantling were observed between the two groups. However, the group operated on with a cemented PFNA showed better functional recovery with a significantly higher rate of walking recovery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Plang et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Pertrochanteric fractures (n=87). Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation (PFNA) with cementing vs. PFNA without cementing was evaluated on Occurrence of disassembly of the osteosynthesis requiring revision surgery (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.13-75.44, p=1). Cementing the cervicocephalic blade during proximal femoral nail osteosynthesis in patients over 90 years old did not significantly reduce the rate of osteosynthesis disassembly compared to uncemented nails (4.35% vs 6.25%, p=1).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: