Introduction. Debate still exists as to the optimum method of fixation for subtrochanteric femoral fractures. Meta-analysis of studies comparing cephalocondylic nails with extramedullary implants for extracapsular hip fractures have suggested that further investigation is required in this area. We present the outcome of the largest series to date of subtrochanteric fractures treated by both methods and with a minimum of one year follow-up. Methods. 244 patients with a subtrochanteric femur fracture were treated at one centre over a 21 year period were prospectively studied. 75 were treated with an extramedullary fixation implant and 168 with an intramedullary nail. Surviving patients were followed up till one year from injury. Results. The mean age of patients was 74 and 71% were female. Fixation failure requiring revision surgery occurred in 4% of those treated with an extramedullary implant and 6% of those treated with an intramedullary nail, a difference that was not statistically significant. Length of surgery was similar for both operations but transfusion requirements were less for those treated by the intramedullary nail (p<0.0001). No notable differences in other outcomes were found. Discussion. In summary both intramedullary and extramedullary fixation produce comparable outcomes for this fracture

Aims

Ankle fracture fixation is commonly performed by junior trainees. Simulation training using cadavers may shorten the learning curve and result in a technically superior surgical performance.

Aims

To compare the outcomes for trochanteric fractures treated with a sliding hip screw (SHS) or a cephalomedullary nail.

Aims

Our aim, using English Hospital Episode Statistics data before during and after the Distal Radius Acute Fracture Fixation Trial (DRAFFT), was to assess whether the results of the trial affected clinical practice.

In a randomised trial involving 598 patients with 600 trochanteric fractures of the hip, the fractures were treated with either a sliding hip screw (n = 300) or a Targon PF intramedullary nail (n = 300). The mean age of the patients was 82 years (26 to 104). All surviving patients were reviewed at one year with functional outcome assessed by a research nurse blinded to the treatment used. The intramedullary nail was found to have a slightly increased mean operative time (46 minutes (sd 12.3) versus 49 minutes (sd 12.7), p < 0.001) and an increased mean radiological screening time (0.3 minutes (sd 0.2) versus 0.5 minutes (sd 0.3), p <  0.001). Operative difficulties were more common with the intramedullary nail. There was no statistically significant difference between implants for wound healing complications (p = 1), or need for post-operative blood transfusion (p = 1), and medical complications were similarly distributed in both groups. There was a tendency to fewer revisions of fixation or conversion to an arthroplasty in the nail group, although the difference was not statistically significant (nine versus three cases, p = 0.14). The extent of shortening, loss of hip flexion, mortality and degree of residual pain were similar in both groups. The recovery of mobility was superior for those treated with the intramedullary nails (p = 0.01 at one year from injury).

In summary, both implants produced comparable results but there was a tendency to better return of mobility for those treated with the intramedullary nail.