Abstract
Controversy exists whether to treat unstable pertrochanteric hip fractures with either intra-medullary or extra-medullary devices. A prospective randomised control trial was performed to compare the outcome of unstable pertrochanteric hip fractures stabilised with either a sliding hip screw or long Gamma Nail. The hypothesis was that there is no difference in outcome between the two modes of treatment.
Over a four year period, 210 patients presenting with an unstable pertrochanteric hip fracture (AO/OTA 31 A2) were recruited into the study. Eligible patients were randomised on admission to either long Gamma Nail or sliding hip screw. Follow-up was arranged for three, six, and twelve months. Primary outcome measures were implant failure or ‘cut-out’. Secondary measures included mortality, length of hospital stay, transfusion rate, change in mobility and residence, and EuroQol outcome score.
Five patients required revision surgery for implant cut-out (2.5%), of which three were long Gamma Nails and two were sliding hip screws (no significant difference). There were no incidences of implant failure or deep infection. Tip apex distance was found to correlate with implant cut-out. There was no statistically significant difference in either the EuroQol outcome scores or mortality rates between the two groups when corrected for mini mental score. There was no difference in transfusion rates, length of hospital stay, and change in mobility or residence. There was a clear cost difference between the implants.
The sliding hip screw remains the gold standard in the treatment of unstable pertrochanteric fractures of the proximal femur.
