Abstract
Hip fracture treatment strategies continue to evolve with the goal of restoring hip fracture victims to Pre-injury Functional levels. Strategies for improved treatment have focused on fracture exposure, reduction, provisional fixation and definitive fixation with implant designs optimised for fracture union with minimal implant failure as originally proposed by Lambotte. Multiple implant designs have been conceived based on perceived inadequacies of previous generational designs. To better understand this evolutionary process, it is necessary to review the predecessors of modern fracture treatment and understand their design concepts and results. It is interesting that the modern era of surgical treatment of hip fractures actually began in 1902, when Dr Royal Whitman advocated the necessity of a closed reduction of adult hip fractures under general anesthesia and stabilisation by hip spica cast. Dr Whitman predicted the evolution of stabilisation by internal fixation and commented on this in his 1932 JBJS editorial emphasising the importance of surgical treatment of fractures. Dr Smith-Peterson, also from New York, in 1925 developed the 1st commercially successful hip implant, a tri–flanged nail. These first surgeries were performed with an open reduction, through a Smith-Petersen approach without radiographic control.
This nail device was rapidly modified in the 1930's to permit insertion over a guide wire with a radiographic controlled insertion technique, a minimally invasive procedure. Nail penetration and implant failure in pertrochanteric fractures led to the rapid development of side-plates and a refocus on reduction stability. This led to a period of primary corrective osteotomies for enhanced stability, but fell out of failure after the sliding hip screw concept took hold. Originally conceived by Godoy-Moreira and Pohl independently in the 1940s, it became rapidly accepted as a method to avoid nail penetration and implant failure, unfortunately at the expense of accepting malunion and collapse of the fracture. Even the importance of rotational stability was discarded as insignificant by Holt in 1963. The concept of reduction of the Antero-Medial cortex was forgotten in favour of the Tip-apex distance as the only important variable in reduction to avoid implant cut-out. The concept of malunion of pertrochanteric fractures was simply deleted from consideration with disregard for the possible association of impaired functional recovery.
Several recent papers that improved functional recovery is possible when these new implants are coupled with successful reduction strategies. Further studies are needed to identify the correct choice of implant for the appropriate fracture configuration, which may lead to a revision of our current fracture classification systems and our concepts of stability.
