Aims. Despite limited clinical scientific backing, an additional trochanteric stabilizing plate (TSP) has been advocated when treating unstable trochanteric fractures with a sliding hip screw (SHS). We aimed to explore whether the TSP would result in less post operative fracture motion, compared to SHS alone. Methods. Overall, 31 patients with AO/OTA 31-A2 trochanteric fractures were randomized to either a SHS alone or a SHS with an additional TSP. To compare postoperative fracture motion, radiostereometric analysis (RSA) was performed before and after weightbearing, and then at four, eight, 12, 26, and 52 weeks. With the “after weightbearing” images as baseline, we calculated translations and rotations, including shortening and medialization of the femoral shaft. Results. Similar migration profiles were observed in all directions during the course of healing. At one year, eight patients in the SHS group and 12 patients in the TSP group were available for analysis, finding a clinically non-relevant, and statistically non-significant, difference in total translation of 1 mm (95% confidence interval -4.7 to 2.9) in favour of the TSP group. In line with the migration data, no significant differences in clinical outcomes were found. Conclusion. The TSP did not influence the course of healing or postoperative fracture motion compared to SHS alone. Based on our results, routine use of the TSP in AO/OTA 31-A2 trochanteric fractures cannot be recommended. The TSP has been shown, in biomechanical studies, to increase stability in sliding hip screw constructs in both unstable and intermediate stable trochanteric fractures, but the clinical evidence is limited. This study showed no advantage of the TSP in unstable (AO 31-A2) fractures in elderly patients when fracture movement was evaluated with radiostereometric analysis. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(1):37–45

The proximal femoral nail (PFN) is a recently introduced intramedullary system, designed to improve treatment of unstable trochanteric fractures of the hip. In a multicentre prospective clinical study, the intra-operative use, complications and outcome of treatment using the PFN (n = 211) were compared with those using the gamma nail (GN) (n = 213). The intra-operative blood loss was lower with the PFN (220 ml v 287 ml, p = 0.001). Post-operatively, more lateral protrusion of the hip screws of the PFN (7.6%) was documented, compared with the gamma nail (1.6%, p = 0.02). Most local complications were related to suboptimal reduction of the fracture and/or positioning of the implant. Functional outcome and consolidation were equal for both implants. Generally, the results of treatment of unstable trochanteric fractures were comparable for the PFN and GN. The pitfalls and complications were similar, and mainly surgeon- or fracture-related, rather than implant-related

Aims. We wished to assess the feasibility of a future randomised controlled trial of parathyroid hormone (PTH) supplements to aid healing of trochanteric fractures of the hip, by an open label prospective feasibility and pilot study with a nested qualitative sub study. This aimed to inform the design of a future powered study comparing the functional recovery after trochanteric hip fracture in patients undergoing standard care, versus those who undergo administration of subcutaneous injection of PTH for six weeks. Patients and Methods. We undertook a pilot study comparing the functional recovery after trochanteric hip fracture in patients 60 years or older, admitted with a trochanteric hip fracture, and potentially eligible to be randomised to either standard care or the administration of subcutaneous PTH for six weeks. Our desired outcomes were functional testing and measures to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the study. Results. A total of 724 patients were screened, of whom 143 (20%) were eligible for recruitment. Of these, 123 were approached and 29 (4%) elected to take part. However, seven patients did not complete the study. Compliance with the injections was 11 out of 15 (73%) showing the intervention to be acceptable and feasible in this patient population. Take home message: Only 4% of patients who met the inclusion criteria were both eligible and willing to consent to a study involving injections of PTH, so delivering this study on a large scale would carry challenges in recruitment and retention. Methodological and sample size planning would have to take this into account. PTH administration to patients to enhance fracture healing should still be considered experimental. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:840–5

Aims. To investigate if preoperative CT improves detection of unstable trochanteric hip fractures. Methods. A single-centre prospective study was conducted. Patients aged 65 years or older with trochanteric hip fractures admitted to Stavanger University Hospital (Stavanger, Norway) were consecutively included from September 2020 to January 2022. Radiographs and CT images of the fractures were obtained, and surgeons made individual assessments of the fractures based on these. The assessment was conducted according to a systematic protocol including three classification systems (AO/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA), Evans Jensen (EVJ), and Nakano) and questions addressing specific fracture patterns. An expert group provided a gold-standard assessment based on the CT images. Sensitivities and specificities of surgeons’ assessments were estimated and compared in regression models with correlations for the same patients. Intra- and inter-rater reliability were presented as Cohen’s kappa and Gwet’s agreement coefficient (AC1). Results. We included 120 fractures in 119 patients. Compared to radiographs, CT increased the sensitivity of detecting unstable trochanteric fractures from 63% to 70% (p = 0.028) and from 70% to 76% (p = 0.004) using AO/OTA and EVJ, respectively. Compared to radiographs alone, CT increased the sensitivity of detecting a large posterolateral trochanter major fragment or a comminuted trochanter major fragment from 63% to 76% (p = 0.002) and from 38% to 55% (p < 0.001), respectively. CT improved intra-rater reliability for stability assessment using EVJ (AC1 0.68 to 0.78; p = 0.049) and for detecting a large posterolateral trochanter major fragment (AC1 0.42 to 0.57; p = 0.031). Conclusion. A preoperative CT of trochanteric fractures increased detection of unstable fractures using the AO/OTA and EVJ classification systems. Compared to radiographs, CT improved intra-rater reliability when assessing fracture stability and detecting large posterolateral trochanter major fragments. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(6):524–531

Aims. Patients with A1 and A2 trochanteric hip fractures represent a substantial proportion of trauma caseload, and national guidelines recommend that sliding hip screws (SHS) should be used for these injuries. Despite this, intramedullary nails (IMNs) are routinely implanted in many hospitals, at extra cost and with unproven patient outcome benefit. We have used data from the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) to examine the use of SHS and IMN for A1 and A2 hip fractures at a national level, and to define the cost implications of management decisions that run counter to national guidelines. Methods. We used the NHFD to identify all operations for fixation of trochanteric fractures in England and Wales between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2021. A uniform price band from each of three hip fracture implant manufacturers was used to set cost implications alongside variation in implant use. Results. We identified 18,156 A1 and A2 trochanteric hip fractures in 162 centres. Of these, 13,483 (74.3%) underwent SHS fixation, 2,352 (13.0%) were managed with short IMN, and 2,321 (12.8%) were managed with long IMN. Total cost of IMN added up to £1.89 million in 2021, and the clinical justification for this is unclear since rates of IMN use varied from 0% to 97% in different centres. Conclusion. Most trochanteric hip fractures are managed with SHS, in keeping with national guidelines. There is considerable variance between hospitals for implant choice, despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of more expensive nailing systems. This suggests either a lack of awareness of national guidelines or a choice not to follow them. We encourage provider units to reassess their practice if outwith the national norm. Funding bodies should examine implant use closely in this population to prevent resource waste at a time of considerable health austerity. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):741–745

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

We conducted a randomised controlled trial to compare external fixation of trochanteric fractures of the femur with the more costly option of the sliding hip screw. Patients in both groups were matched for age (mean 67 years, 50 to 100) and gender. We excluded all pathological fractures, patients presenting at more than one week, fractures with subtrochanteric extension or reverse obliquity, multiple fractures or any bone and joint disease interfering with rehabilitation. The interval between injury and operation, the duration of surgery, the amount of blood loss, the length of hospital stay and the cost of treatment were all significantly higher in the sliding hip screw group (p < 0.05). The time to union, range of movement, mean Harris hip scores and Western Ontario and McMaster University knee scores were comparable at six months. The number of patients showing shortening or malrotation was too small to show a significant difference between the groups. Pin-track infection occurred in 18 patients (60%) treated with external fixation, whereas there was a single case of wound infection (3.3%) in the sliding hip screw group

Aims. This study evaluated variation in the surgical treatment of stable (A1) and unstable (A2) trochanteric hip fractures among an international group of orthopaedic surgeons, and determined the influence of patient, fracture, and surgeon characteristics on choice of implant (intramedullary nailing (IMN) versus sliding hip screw (SHS)). Methods. A total of 128 orthopaedic surgeons in the Science of Variation Group evaluated radiographs of 30 patients with Type A1 and A2 trochanteric hip fractures and indicated their preferred treatment: IMN or SHS. The management of Type A3 (reverse obliquity) trochanteric fractures was not evaluated. Agreement between surgeons was calculated using multirater kappa. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to assess whether patient, fracture, and surgeon characteristics were independently associated with choice of implant. Results. The overall agreement between surgeons on implant choice was fair (kappa = 0.27 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 0.28)). Factors associated with preference for IMN included USA compared to Europe or the UK (Europe odds ratio (OR) 0.56 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.67); UK OR 0.16 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.22); p < 0.001); exposure to IMN only during training compared to surgeons that were exposed to both (only IMN during training OR 2.6 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.4); p < 0.001); and A2 compared to A1 fractures (Type A2 OR 10 (95% CI 8.4 to 12); p < 0.001). Conclusion. In an international cohort of orthopaedic surgeons, there was a large variation in implant preference for patients with A1 and A2 trochanteric fractures. This is due to surgeon bias (country of practice and aspects of training). The observation that surgeons favoured the more expensive implant (IMN) in the absence of convincing evidence of its superiority suggests that surgeon de-biasing strategies may be a useful focus for optimizing patient outcomes and promoting value-based healthcare. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):775–781

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

Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between the type of operation used to treat a trochanteric fracture of the hip and 30-day mortality. Patients and Methods. Data on 82 990 patients from the National Hip Fracture Database were analyzed using generalized linear models with incremental case-mix adjustment for patient, non-surgical and surgical characteristics, and socioeconomic factors. Results. The use of short and long intramedullary nails was associated with an increase in 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.125, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.040 to 1.218; p = 0.004) compared with the use of sliding hip screws (12.5% increase). If this were causative, it would represent 98 excess deaths over the four-year period of the study and one excess death would be caused by treating 112 patients with an intramedullary nail rather than a sliding hip screw. Conclusion. There is a 12.5% increase in the risk of 30-day mortality associated with the use of an intramedullary nail compared with a sliding hip screw in the treatment of a trochanteric fractures of the hip

Aims. A lack of supporting clinical studies have been published to determine the ideal length of intramedullary nail in fixation of trochanteric fractures of the hip. Nevertheless, there has been a trend to use shorter intramedullary nails for the internal fixation of trochanteric hip fractures. Our aim was to determine if the length of nail affected the outcome. Methods. We randomized 229 patients with a trochanteric hip fracture between two implants: a ‘standard’ nail of 220 mm and a shorter nail of 175 mm, which had decreased proximal angulation (4° vs 7°) and a reduced diameter at the level of the lesser trochanter. Patients were followed up for one year by a nurse blinded to the type of implant used to determine if there were differences in mobility and pain with two nail designs. Pain was assessed on a scale of 1 (none) to 8 (severe and constant) and mobility on a scale of 1 (full mobility) to 9 (immobile). Results. The shorter nail did not require any reaming of the femur and was quicker to insert (mean difference 5.1 minutes; p < 0.001, 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference 3.16 to 7.04). Those treated by the shorter nail were less mobile (mean difference in reduction in mobility score at one year 0.80; p = 0.007, 95% CI 1.38 to 0.22). In addition, there was a trend toward greater residual pain for those treated with the shorter nail, although this was not statistically significant (mean difference in pain score at one year 0.24; p = 0.064, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.49). Conclusion. These results suggest that the increasing use of this very short intramedullary nail with its design modification may not be appropriate. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(3):394–399

We undertook a trial on 60 patients with AO 31A2 fractures of the hip who were randomised after stabilisation of the fracture into two equal groups, one of which received post-operative treatment using a non-invasive interactive neurostimulation device and the other with a sham device. All other aspects of their rehabilitation were the same. The treatment was continued for ten days after operation.

Outcome measurements included the use of a visual analogue scale for pain, the brief pain inventory and Ketorolac for post-operative control of pain, and an overall assessment of outcome by the surgeon. There were significantly better results for the patients receiving treatment by active electrical stimulation (repeated measures analysis of variance, p < 0.001). The findings of this pilot trial justify a larger study to determine if these results are more generally applicable.

Aims. To compare the outcomes for trochanteric fractures treated with a sliding hip screw (SHS) or a cephalomedullary nail. Patients and Methods. A total of 400 patients with a trochanteric hip fracture were randomised to receive a SHS or a cephalomedullary nail (Targon PFT). All surviving patients were followed up to one year from injury. Functional outcome was assessed by a research nurse blinded to the implant used. Results. Recovery of mobility, as assessed by a mobility scale, was superior for those treated with the intramedullary nail compared with the SHS at eight weeks, three and nine months (p-values between 0.01 and 0.04), the difference at six and 12 months was not statistically significant (p = 0.15 and p = 0.18 respectively). The mean difference was around 0.4 points (0.3 to 0.5) on a nine point scale. Surgical time for the nail was four minutes less than that for the SHS (p < 0.001). Fracture healing complications were similar for the two groups. There were no statistically significant differences between implants for any other recorded outcomes including the need for post-operative blood transfusion, wound healing complications, general medical complications, hospital stay or mortality. Conclusion. This study confirms the findings of a previous study that both methods of treatment produce similar results, although intramedullary fixation does result in marginally improved regain of mobility in comparison with the SHS. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1210–15

Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate if there are differences in outcome between sliding hip screws (SHSs) and intramedullary nails (IMNs) with regard to fracture stability. Methods. We assessed data from 17,341 patients with trochanteric or subtrochanteric fractures treated with SHS or IMN in the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register from 2013 to 2019. Primary outcome measures were reoperations for stable fractures (AO Foundation/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) type A1) and unstable fractures (AO/OTA type A2, A3, and subtrochanteric fractures). Secondary outcome measures were reoperations for A2, A3, and subtrochanteric fractures individually, one-year mortality, quality of life (EuroQol five-dimension three-level index score), pain (visual analogue scale (VAS)), and satisfaction (VAS) for stable and unstable fractures. Hazard rate ratios (HRRs) for reoperation were calculated using Cox regression analysis with adjustments for age, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists score. Results. Reoperation rate was lower after surgery with IMN for unstable fractures one year (HRR 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 0.97; p = 0.022) and three years postoperatively (HRR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.99; p = 0.036), compared with SHS. For individual fracture types, no clinically significant differences were found. Lower one-year mortality was found for IMN compared with SHS for stable fractures (HRR 0.87; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.96; p = 0.007), and unstable fractures (HRR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.98; p = 0.014). Conclusion. This national register-based study indicates a lower reoperation rate for IMN than SHS for unstable trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures, but not for stable fractures or individual fracture types. The choice of implant may not be decisive to the outcome of treatment for stable trochanteric fractures in terms of reoperation rate. One-year mortality rate for unstable and stable fractures was lower in patients treated with IMN. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(2):274–282

The aim of this study was to quantify the stability of fracture-implant complex in fractures after fixation. A total of 15 patients with an undisplaced fracture of the femoral neck, treated with either a dynamic hip screw or three cannulated hip screws, and 16 patients with an AO31-A2 trochanteric fracture treated with a dynamic hip screw or a Gamma Nail, were included. Radiostereometric analysis was used at six weeks, four months and 12 months post-operatively to evaluate shortening and rotation. Migration could be assessed in ten patients with a fracture of the femoral neck and seven with a trochanteric fracture. By four months post-operatively, a mean shortening of 5.4 mm (-0.04 to 16.1) had occurred in the fracture of the femoral neck group and 5.0 mm (-0.13 to 12.9) in the trochanteric fracture group. A wide range of rotation occurred in both types of fracture. Right-sided trochanteric fractures seem more rotationally stable than left-sided fractures. This prospective study shows that migration at the fracture site occurs continuously during the first four post-operative months, after which stabilisation occurs. This information may allow the early recognition of patients at risk of failure of fixation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:391–7

Aims. The aim of this study was to describe variation in hip fracture treatment in Norway expressed as adherence to international and national evidence-based treatment guidelines, to study factors influencing deviation from guidelines, and to analyze consequences of non-adherence. Methods. International and national guidelines were identified and treatment recommendations extracted. All 43 hospitals routinely treating hip fractures in Norway were characterized. From the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register (NHFR), hip fracture patients aged > 65 years and operated in the period January 2014 to December 2018 for fractures with conclusive treatment guidelines were included (n = 29,613: femoral neck fractures (n = 21,325), stable trochanteric fractures (n = 5,546), inter- and subtrochanteric fractures (n = 2,742)). Adherence to treatment recommendations and a composite indicator of best practice were analyzed. Patient survival and reoperations were evaluated for each recommendation. Results. Median age of the patients was 84 (IQR 77 to 89) years and 69% (20,427/29,613) were women. Overall, 79% (23,390/29,613) were treated within 48 hours, and 80% (23,635/29,613) by a surgeon with more than three years’ experience. Adherence to guidelines varied substantially but was markedly better in 2018 than in 2014. Having a dedicated hip fracture unit (OR 1.06, 95%CI 1.01 to 1.11) and a hospital hip fracture programme (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.27) increased the probability of treatment according to best practice. Surgery after 48 hours increased one-year mortality significantly (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.22; p = 0.001). Alternative treatment to arthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures (FNFs) increased mortality after 30 days (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.62)) and one year (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.72), and also increased the number of reoperations (OR 4.61, 95% CI 3.73 to 5.71). An uncemented stem increased the risk of reoperation significantly (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.48; p = 0.030). Conclusion. Our study demonstrates a substantial variation between hospitals in adherence to evidence-based guidelines for treatment of hip fractures in Norway. Non-adherence can be ascribed to in-hospital factors. Poor adherence has significant negative consequences for patients in the form of increased mortality rates at 30 and 365 days post-treatment and in reoperation rates. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-10:644–653

We studied 217 patients with an unstable trochanteric or subtrochanteric fracture who had been randomly allocated to treatment by either internal fixation with a standard Gamma nail (SGN) or a Medoff sliding plate (MSP, biaxial dynamisation mode). Their mean age was 84 years (65 to 99) and they were reviewed at four and 12 months after surgery. Assessments of outcome included general complications, technical failures, revision surgery, activities of daily living (ADL), hip function (Charnley score) and the health-related quality of life (HRQOL, EQ-5D). The rate of technical failure in patients with unstable trochanteric fractures was 6.5% (6/93) (including intra-operative femoral fractures) in the SGN group and 5.2% (5/96) in the MSP group. In patients with subtrochanteric fractures, there were no failures in the SGN group (n = 16) and two in the MSP group (n = 12). In the SGN group, there were intra-operative femoral fractures in 2.8% (3/109) and no post-operative fractures. There was a reduced need for revision surgery in the SGN group compared with the MSP group (8.3%; 9/108; p = 0.072). The SGN group also showed a lower incidence of severe general complications (p < 0.05) and a trend towards a lower incidence of wound infections (p = 0.05). There were no differences between the groups regarding the outcome of ADL, hip function or the HRQOL. The reduction in the HRQOL (EQ-5D. index. score) was significant in both groups compared with that before the fracture (p < 0.005). Our findings indicate that the SGN showed good results in both trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures. The limited number of intra-operative femoral fractures did not influence the outcome or the need for revision surgery. Moreover, the SGN group had a reduced number of serious general complications and wound infections compared with the MSP group. The MSP in the biaxial dynamisation mode had a low rate of failure in trochanteric fractures but an unacceptably high rate when used in the biaxial dynamisation mode in subtrochanteric fractures. The negative influence of an unstable trochanteric or subtrochanteric fracture on the quality of life was significant regardless of the surgical method

Aims

This study aimed to compare mortality in trochanteric AO/OTA A1 and A2 fractures treated with an intramedullary nail (IMN) or sliding hip screw (SHS). The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality, with secondary endpoints at 0 to 1, 2 to 7, 8 to 30, 90, and 365 days.

Aims

Factors associated with high mortality rates in geriatric hip fracture patients are frequently unmodifiable. Time to surgery, however, might be a modifiable factor of interest to optimize clinical outcomes after hip fracture surgery. This study aims to determine the influence of postponement of surgery due to non-medical reasons on clinical outcomes in acute hip fracture surgery.

Aims

The use of multimodal non-opioid analgesia in hip fractures, specifically acetaminophen combined with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), has been increasing. However, the effectiveness and safety of this approach remain unclear. This study aimed to compare postoperative outcomes among patients with hip fractures who preoperatively received either acetaminophen combined with NSAIDs, NSAIDs alone, or acetaminophen alone.