A comparative study of screw and helical proximal femoral nails for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures

Jung-Ho Park, Yong Seuk Lee, Jong Woong Park, Joon Ho Wang, Jae Gyoon Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The goal of this study was to compare treatment outcomes of screw proximal femoral nails and helical proximal femoral nails and to investigate the effectiveness of helical proximal femoral nails for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. Forty patients with intertrochanteric fractures were treated at our institution between January 2005 and January 2007, with a minimum follow-up of 1.5 years. Seventeen patients were treated with screw proximal femoral nails (mean patient age, 67 years; age range, 45-89 years; men:women ratio, 3:14), and 23 were treated with helical proximal femoral nails (mean patient age, 74 years; age range, 64-91 years; men:women ratio, 6:17). We evaluated mean operation time, amount of bleeding, time to ambulation, average union period, changes in neck shaft angle, and complications, and performed radiographic reviews, telephone interviews, and direct contact interviews at an outpatient clinic. We evaluated postoperative function and mobility using social function scores and mobility scores. Helical proximal femoral nails produced better results in terms of social function scores, mobility scores, and complication rates with statistical significance. No significant differences were found between the 2 nails in terms of mean operation time, amount of bleeding, average union period, time to ambulation, or neck shaft angle changes. Screw proximal femoral nails and helical proximal femoral nails are suitable implants for intertrochanteric fractures, but helical proximal femoral nails are better in terms of functional aspects and complication rates.

Original languageEnglish
JournalOrthopedics
Volume33
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010 Feb 1

Fingerprint

Hip Fractures
Nails
Thigh
Therapeutics
Bleeding Time
Walking
Neck
Social Mobility
Interviews
Ambulatory Care Facilities

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

A comparative study of screw and helical proximal femoral nails for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. / Park, Jung-Ho; Lee, Yong Seuk; Park, Jong Woong; Wang, Joon Ho; Kim, Jae Gyoon.

In: Orthopedics, Vol. 33, No. 2, 01.02.2010.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c192c9ed831f4c2ebd2f718608a86177,
title = "A comparative study of screw and helical proximal femoral nails for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures",
abstract = "The goal of this study was to compare treatment outcomes of screw proximal femoral nails and helical proximal femoral nails and to investigate the effectiveness of helical proximal femoral nails for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. Forty patients with intertrochanteric fractures were treated at our institution between January 2005 and January 2007, with a minimum follow-up of 1.5 years. Seventeen patients were treated with screw proximal femoral nails (mean patient age, 67 years; age range, 45-89 years; men:women ratio, 3:14), and 23 were treated with helical proximal femoral nails (mean patient age, 74 years; age range, 64-91 years; men:women ratio, 6:17). We evaluated mean operation time, amount of bleeding, time to ambulation, average union period, changes in neck shaft angle, and complications, and performed radiographic reviews, telephone interviews, and direct contact interviews at an outpatient clinic. We evaluated postoperative function and mobility using social function scores and mobility scores. Helical proximal femoral nails produced better results in terms of social function scores, mobility scores, and complication rates with statistical significance. No significant differences were found between the 2 nails in terms of mean operation time, amount of bleeding, average union period, time to ambulation, or neck shaft angle changes. Screw proximal femoral nails and helical proximal femoral nails are suitable implants for intertrochanteric fractures, but helical proximal femoral nails are better in terms of functional aspects and complication rates.",
author = "Jung-Ho Park and Lee, {Yong Seuk} and Park, {Jong Woong} and Wang, {Joon Ho} and Kim, {Jae Gyoon}",
year = "2010",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3928/01477447-20100104-11",
language = "English",
volume = "33",
journal = "Orthopedics",
issn = "0147-7447",
publisher = "Slack Incorporated",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparative study of screw and helical proximal femoral nails for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures

AU - Park, Jung-Ho

AU - Lee, Yong Seuk

AU - Park, Jong Woong

AU - Wang, Joon Ho

AU - Kim, Jae Gyoon

PY - 2010/2/1

Y1 - 2010/2/1

N2 - The goal of this study was to compare treatment outcomes of screw proximal femoral nails and helical proximal femoral nails and to investigate the effectiveness of helical proximal femoral nails for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. Forty patients with intertrochanteric fractures were treated at our institution between January 2005 and January 2007, with a minimum follow-up of 1.5 years. Seventeen patients were treated with screw proximal femoral nails (mean patient age, 67 years; age range, 45-89 years; men:women ratio, 3:14), and 23 were treated with helical proximal femoral nails (mean patient age, 74 years; age range, 64-91 years; men:women ratio, 6:17). We evaluated mean operation time, amount of bleeding, time to ambulation, average union period, changes in neck shaft angle, and complications, and performed radiographic reviews, telephone interviews, and direct contact interviews at an outpatient clinic. We evaluated postoperative function and mobility using social function scores and mobility scores. Helical proximal femoral nails produced better results in terms of social function scores, mobility scores, and complication rates with statistical significance. No significant differences were found between the 2 nails in terms of mean operation time, amount of bleeding, average union period, time to ambulation, or neck shaft angle changes. Screw proximal femoral nails and helical proximal femoral nails are suitable implants for intertrochanteric fractures, but helical proximal femoral nails are better in terms of functional aspects and complication rates.

AB - The goal of this study was to compare treatment outcomes of screw proximal femoral nails and helical proximal femoral nails and to investigate the effectiveness of helical proximal femoral nails for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. Forty patients with intertrochanteric fractures were treated at our institution between January 2005 and January 2007, with a minimum follow-up of 1.5 years. Seventeen patients were treated with screw proximal femoral nails (mean patient age, 67 years; age range, 45-89 years; men:women ratio, 3:14), and 23 were treated with helical proximal femoral nails (mean patient age, 74 years; age range, 64-91 years; men:women ratio, 6:17). We evaluated mean operation time, amount of bleeding, time to ambulation, average union period, changes in neck shaft angle, and complications, and performed radiographic reviews, telephone interviews, and direct contact interviews at an outpatient clinic. We evaluated postoperative function and mobility using social function scores and mobility scores. Helical proximal femoral nails produced better results in terms of social function scores, mobility scores, and complication rates with statistical significance. No significant differences were found between the 2 nails in terms of mean operation time, amount of bleeding, average union period, time to ambulation, or neck shaft angle changes. Screw proximal femoral nails and helical proximal femoral nails are suitable implants for intertrochanteric fractures, but helical proximal femoral nails are better in terms of functional aspects and complication rates.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77949304689&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77949304689&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3928/01477447-20100104-11

DO - 10.3928/01477447-20100104-11

M3 - Article

C2 - 20192140

AN - SCOPUS:77949304689

VL - 33

JO - Orthopedics

JF - Orthopedics

SN - 0147-7447

IS - 2

ER -