Comparing Dynamic Hip Screw to External Fixation for Treatment of Osteoporotic Pertrochanteric Fractures: A Prospective Randomized Study

A. Moroni; C. Faldini; F. Pegreffi; A. Hoang-Kim; F. Vannini; S. Giannini

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.284-286.1037

Paper Titles

Investigations of the Mechanical Properties of an Alumina Toughened Zirconia Ceramic for an Application in Joint Prostheses
p.1019

Surface Energies Acting at the Interfaces of Ceramics and Glasses while in Contact with Organic and Biological Liquids
p.1023

Development of an Alumina Ceramic with a Gradient of Concentration and Microstructure for the Application of Load Bearing Implants
p.1027

Clinical Outcome of Current Generation Hydroxyapatite Coated Acetabular Design
p.1033

Comparing Dynamic Hip Screw to External Fixation for Treatment of Osteoporotic Pertrochanteric Fractures: A Prospective Randomized Study
p.1037

Biological Behaviour of Bonelike^® Graft Implanted in the Tibia of Humans
p.1041

Hydroxyapatite Hip Arthroplasty in Patients under the Age of 50
p.1045

16 Year Review of Hydroxyapatite Ceramic Coated Hip Implants - A Clinical and Histological Evaluation
p.1049

A New Injectable Bone Substitute Concept (MBCP Gel ^TM): First Clinical Results in Human Maxillo-Facial Surgery
p.1053

HomeKey Engineering MaterialsKey Engineering Materials Vols. 284-286Comparing Dynamic Hip Screw to External Fixation...

Comparing Dynamic Hip Screw to External Fixation for Treatment of Osteoporotic Pertrochanteric Fractures: A Prospective Randomized Study

Abstract:

External fixation has proven to be a viable minimally invasive treatment option for elderly patients with trochanteric fractures. Postoperative complications has limited external fixation in relation to inadequate pin fixation. We compared Orthofix pertrochanteric fixator (OPF) with hydroxyapatite-coated pins to dynamic hip screw (DHS) with AO/ASIF stainless-steel screws in osteoporotic trochanteric fractures. Methods: Forty patients were divided into two groups and randomized for treatment with 135° 4-hole DHS (Group A) or OPF with four hydroxyapatite-coated pins (Group B). Inclusion criteria was: female, age ≥ 65 years, AO fracture type A1 or A2 and BMD lower than -2.5 T-score. All fixators were removed at 3 months. Results: There were no differences in patient age, fracture type, BMD, ASA, hospital stay and reduction quality. Average number of blood transfusions was 2.0 ± 0.1 in Group A, whereas there were none in Group B (p < 0.0001). Operative time was 64 ± 6 minutes in Group A and 34 ± 5 in Group B (p < 0.005). Post-operative femoral neck shaft angle was 134 ± 6° in Group A, and 132 ± 4° in Group B (ns). In Group A, fracture varization at 6 months was 6 ± 8°, in Group B 2 ± 1° (p = 0.002). Harris hip score was 62 ± 20 in Group A and 63 ± 17 in Group B. (n.s.) In Group B, no pin infection occurred. Pin fixation was maintained over time, as shown by no significant difference between pin extraction and corresponding insertion torque. Discussion and Conclusion: In external fixation with hydroxyapatite-coated pins there was no need for blood transfusions and fixation was superior, as confirmed by less varization at long-term.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Key Engineering Materials (Volumes 284-286)

Pages:

1037-1040

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.284-286.1037

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

April 2005

Authors:

A. Moroni, C. Faldini, F. Pegreffi, A. Hoang-Kim, F. Vannini, S. Giannini

Keywords:

Biomaterial, External Fixation Pin, Hydroxyapatite (HAP), Osteoporotic Trochanteric Fracture

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

References

[1] N.A. Christodoulou and C.V. Sdrenias: Clin. Orthop. Vol. 381(2000), pp.204-211.

Google Scholar

[2] S. Larsson: Scan. J. Surgery 91(2002), pp.140-146.

Google Scholar

[3] I.C. Vossinakis and L.S. Badras: J. Bone Joint Surg (Br) Vol. 84(2002), pp.23-29.

Google Scholar

[4] I.H. Scott: Clin. Orthop. 10(1957), pp.326-334.

Google Scholar

[5] A. Moroni, C. Faldini, S. Marchetti, M. Manca, V. Consoli and S. Giannini: J. Bone Joint Surg. (Am) Vol. 83 (2001), pp.717-21.

Google Scholar

[6] A. Moroni, S. Toksvig-Larsen, M.C. Maltarello and S. Giannini: J. Bone Joint Surg. (Am) Vol. 4 (1998), pp.547-554.

Google Scholar

[7] A. Moroni, J. Heikkila, G. Magyar, S. Toksvig-Larsen and S. Giannini: Clin. Orthop. Vol. 388 (2001), pp.209-17.

Google Scholar

[8] P. Regazzoni, T. Rüedi, R. Winquist: The Dynamic hip screw system. Springer Verlag 1- 50, 1984. Figures FIGURE 1. (1) Pin position #1 (cancellous bone) (2) Pin position #2 (cancellous bone) (3) Pin position #3 (cortical bone) (4) Pin position #4 (cortical bone) FIGURE 2. X-rays showing a 83-year-old patient treated with OPF. The reduction was well-maintained. #1 #3 #2 #4 PRE OP 3 MONTHS 6 MONTHS.

DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.1998.tb00131.x

Google Scholar