Introduction. Unstable intertrochanteric hip fractures (AO 31A2) continue to be a challenge, as non-locking implants have shown a considerable rate of loss of reduction. Intramedullary fixation has been recommended, although screw cut-out has been identified as problematic. This study was performed to ascertain whether treatments with the established proximal femoral nail (PFN) and the newer PFNA with blade design (proximal femoral nail antirotation) have advantages over the use of the Percutaneous Compression Plate (PCCP, developed by Gotfried). Methods. Cohort study. Between March 2003 and March 2008, 134 patients with unstable fractures were treated with a PCCP, (n=44, 78.3 yrs, ASA 2.8), a PFN (n=50, 77.2 yrs, ASA 2.8), or a PFNA (n=40, 75.8 yrs, ASA 2.6). The patients (31 PCCP, 33 PFN, 30 PFNA) were then reexamined clinically and radiologically after approximately 21 months. Results. The PCCP was found to require less implantation time than the PFN and the PFNA (60 vs. 80 vs. 84 min, p<0.001) and less radiation exposition time (PCCP 139 vs. PFN 283 vs. PFNA 188 seconds, p<0.001). The rate of reoperations due to wound infections and hematomas amounted to 2% for the PCCP, 4% for the PFN, and 5% for the PFNA (p=0.799). Due to mechanical complications, 9% of patients implanted with a PCCP, 13% of those implanted with a PFN, and 5% of those implanted with a PFNA had to be reoperated (p=0.353). The cut-out rate was 2% after implantation of the PCCP, 4% after the PFN, and 5% after implantation of the PFNA (p=0.799). In one case, the shaft was fractured intraoperatively (PFNA). The tip-apex distance for the lower femoral neck screw (PCCP 22mm vs. PFN 30mm vs. PFNA 30mm, p<0.001), stress-related varisation of the collodiaphyseal (CCD) angle (4° for all implants), impaction (PCCP 5mm vs. PFN 5mm vs. PFNA 6mm, p=0.662) and femoral shortening (PCCP 3mm vs. PFN 3mm vs. PFNA 4mm, p=0.876) were not determinants of the postoperative function. On the basis of their scores according to Merle d'Aubigné and Harris, there was no variation in the results of the follow-up examinations. Conclusions. The use of the PCCP for the treatment of unstable trochanteric fractures presents a minimally invasive method of implantation, as well as a promising therapy option with regards to operation time, radiologic examination time, and rate of complications. Processes of impaction due to stress are seldom observed. No benefits could be established in an intramedullary treatment with the PFN or the PFNA; thus, it appears that the higher cost of these implants is avoidable

Objectives. Because of the contradictory body of evidence related to the potential benefits of helical blades in trochanteric fracture fixation, we studied the effect of bone compaction resulting from the insertion of a proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA). . Methods. We developed a subject-specific computational model of a trochanteric fracture (31-A2 in the AO classification) with lack of medial support and varied the bone density to account for variability in bone properties among hip fracture patients. Results. We show that for a bone density corresponding to 100% of the bone density of the cadaveric femur, there does not seem to be any advantage in using a PFNA with respect to the risk of blade cut-out. On the other hand, in a more osteoporotic femoral head characterised by a density corresponding to 75% of the initial bone density, local bone compaction around the helical blade provides additional bone purchase, thereby decreasing the risk of cut-out, as quantified by the volume of bone susceptible to yielding. Conclusions. Our findings indicate benefits of using a PFNA over an intramedullary nail with a conventional lag screw and suggest that any clinical trial reporting surgical outcomes regarding the use of helical blades should include a measure of the femoral head bone density as a covariable

Introduction. When translating the principle of intramedullary nailing for trochanteric femoral fractures to Asian patients, design modifications made to adjust for anatomic differences resulted in an PFNA Asia. The primary endpoint of this study was the rate of complications attributable to fracture fixation. Material and methods. A prospective multicenter case series was performed; 176 patients with a median age of 84 with unstable trochanteric fractures treated with a PFNA Asia were included and followed for one year postoperatively. Complications were reviewed by a complication review board (CRB). Intra- and postoperative fracture fixation complications are presented according to type and incidence proportions (risk). Results. The CRB identified a total of three intraoperative (1.7%) and 14 postoperative fracture fixation complications (8%). Intraoperative complications included a problem with distal locking (1) and poor intraoperative reduction (2). Postoperative fracture fixation problems included significant neck shortening (8), implant breakage (3), cut-outs (2), and one severe loss of reduction. Outcome for most complications was adequate and none were classified as definitely related to the implant design but rather to surgical technique. Discussion & Conclusion. The adaptation of size and geometry to Asian patients leads to a low incidence of intra- and postoperative fracture fixation complications comparable to other studies

Introduction. An important factor in the internal fixation of pertrochanteric fractures is the ability to maintain postoperative reduction. Excessive postoperative sliding of the lag screw or blade may result in reduction loss. We retrospectively analyzed the relationship between postoperative reduction and sliding. Methodology. From Oct. 2009 to Sept. 2011, we treated pertrochanteric fractures using J-PFNA (Synthes) and InterTAN (Smith & Nephew) in 91 cases and 82 cases, respectively. We used postoperative radiographs to classify its reduction. Fractures were classified for its interfragmentary contact using the calcar femorale as a reference on the A-P plane while using the anterior cortex as a reference on the M-L plane. Results. PFNA cases showed greater postoperative sliding than InterTAN cases. Both demonstrated greater sliding when the proximal fragment was positioned inside the medullary canal on the M-L plane than when positioned outside or anatomically. Conclusion. Although the InterTAN can maintain greater initial stability necessary for early weight-bearing, both implants demonstrate the loss of interfragmentary contact when the proximal fragment is positioned inside the medullary canal on the M-L plane resulting in greater risk of reduction loss. In order to maintain postoperative reduction, either anatomical reduction or reducing the proximal fragment outside the medullary canal is advised; no matter what type of internal fixation implants are used

INTRODUCTION. Short femoral nail is the most popular instrumentation for femoral trochanteric fractures. PFNA is in widely use and good results are reported. In these papers, fracture classification and evaluation of surgical results were based on plain X-ray. However, some cases of delayed union, non-union, and blade cut out showed no critical problems in immediate postoperative X-ray. Cause of these complications was not able to solve in X-ray analysis. CT scan provides more information about fracture pattern and position of nail and blade. CT analysis is likely to solve the cause of these complications. MATERIALS & METHODS. 20 cases of 36 femoral trochanteric fractures treated with PFNA-II were evaluated by CT scan (pre and post surgery). Four males and 16 females, and average age at surgery was 80.5 (65–100). Eleven cases were A1 fracture and 9 cases were A2 fracture in AO classification. Nail insertion hole was made by custom made Hollow Reamer. Fracture classification with 3D-CT (Nakano's classification), position of nail insertion hole (relationship between neck or head), and postoperative evaluation with 3D-CT insertion part of nail and blade were investigated. RESULTS. Nakano classified femoral trochanteric fracture into 7 types in 3D-CT. Two subtype in 2 part fracture, 4 subtype in 3 part fracture and 4part fracture. Seven cases were two part fracture, 11 were three part, and 2 were four part in our series. Five cases of 11 in 3 part fracture was considered unstable type. Nail insertion hole of six cases was made posteriory to the connecting line between neck center and head center. Fracture line of greater trochnater in lateral wall opened in 4 cases because of nail insertion. DISCUSSION. Femoral trochanteric fracture was classified by Evans classification or AO classification. However, it is very difficult to classify the fracture by plain X-P. Classification with 3D-CT is very usefull to distinguish which the fracture is stable or unstable. CT analysis will solve the postoperative complications in stable type in X-P classification