We biomechanically investigated whether the standard dynamic hip screw (DHS) or the DHS blade achieves better fixation in bone with regard to resistance to pushout, pullout and torsional stability. The experiments were undertaken in an artificial bone substrate in the form of polyurethane foam blocks with predefined mechanical properties. Pushout tests were also repeated in cadaveric femoral heads. The results showed that the DHS blade outperformed the DHS with regard to the two most important characteristics of implant fixation, namely resistance to pushout and rotational stability. We concluded that the DHS blade was the superior implant in this study

Introduction. The objective of this study was to determine if a synthetic bone substitute would provide results similar to bone from osteoporotic femoral heads during in vitro testing with orthopaedic implants. If the synthetic material could produce results similar to those of the osteoporotic bone, it could reduce or eliminate the need for testing of implants on bone. Methods. Pushout studies were performed with the dynamic hip screw (DHS) and the DHS Blade in both cadaveric femoral heads and artificial bone substitutes in the form of polyurethane foam blocks of different density. The pushout studies were performed as a means of comparing the force displacement curves produced by each implant within each material. Results. The results demonstrated that test material with a density of 0.16 g/cm. 3. (block A) produced qualitatively similar force displacement curves for the DHS and qualitatively and quantitatively similar force displacement curves for the DHS Blade, whereas the test material with a density of 0.08 g/cm. 3. (block B) did not produce results that were predictive of those recorded within the osteoporotic cadaveric femoral heads. Conclusion. This study demonstrates that synthetic material with a density of 0.16 g/cm. 3. can provide a good substitute for cadaveric osteoporotic femoral heads in the testing of implants. However we do recognise that no synthetic material can be considered as a definitive substitute for bone, therefore studies performed with artificial bone substrates may need to be validated by further testing with a small bone sample in order to produce conclusive results

Objectives

Fractures of the proximal femur are a common clinical problem, and a number of orthopaedic devices are available for the treatment of such fractures. The objective of this study was to assess the rotational stability, a common failure predictor, of three different rotational control design philosophies: a screw, a helical blade and a deployable crucifix.

The spiral blade modification of the Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) was designed for superior biomechanical fixation in the osteoporotic femoral head. Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes and in particular the incidence of loss of fixation.

In a series of 197 consecutive patients over the age of 50 years treated with DHS-blades (blades) and 242 patients treated with conventional DHS (screw) for AO/OTA 31.A1 or A2 intertrochanteric fractures were identified from a prospectively compiled database in a level 1 trauma centre. Using propensity score matching, two groups comprising 177 matched patients were compiled and radiological and clinical outcomes compared. In each group there were 66 males and 111 females. Mean age was 83.6 (54 to 100) for the conventional DHS group and 83.8 (52 to 101) for the blade group.

Loss of fixation occurred in two blades and 13 DHSs. None of the blades had observable migration while nine DHSs had gross migration within the femoral head before the fracture healed. There were two versus four implant cut-outs respectively and one side plate pull-out in the DHS group. There was no significant difference in mortality and eventual walking ability between the groups. Multiple logistic regression suggested that poor reduction (odds ratio (OR) 11.49, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.45 to 90.9, p = 0.021) and fixation by DHS (OR 15.85, 95%CI 2.50 to 100.3, p = 0.003) were independent predictors of loss of fixation.

The spiral blade design may decrease the risk of implant migration in the femoral head but does not reduce the incidence of cut-out and reoperation. Reduction of the fracture is of paramount importance since poor reduction was an independent predictor for loss of fixation regardless of the implant being used.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:398–404.

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).