Distal Locked versus Unlocked Intramedullary Nailing in Intertrochanteric Fracture; A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Non-Randomized Trials

Intertrochanteric Femoral Fractures: A Comparative Analysis of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes Between Talon Intramedullary Nail and Intertan Nail

Introduction Hip fractures in the elderly constitute a significant health concern, and their incidence is on the rise. It has been reported that intertrochanteric femoral fractures comprise a large portion of hip fractures, and they are especially prevalent among women. Over 75% of these types of fractures in the elderly occur as a result of simple falls. Surgical intervention must be performed for these fractures to expedite the healing process in patients. The application of a proximal femoral nail (PFN) is conducted using a minimally invasive technique after the fracture has been reduced using closed techniques. This technique maintains the fracture hematoma while minimizing the occurrence of consequences such as surgical trauma, hemorrhaging, infection, and issues with the wound site. This study aimed to assess the radiologic and functional outcomes among the groups following surgical procedures utilizing two distinct PFNs. Methods Between November 2021 and June 2023, a total of 96 individuals (38 males and 58 females) who underwent surgery for ITF using PFN were included in the study. Our surgical team utilized the Talon™ DistalFix™ PFN system (Orthopedic Designs North America Inc., FL, USA) and the Trigen InterTAN® nail (Smith & Nephew). Results The surgery time (number of scopes) for the Talon PFN was recorded as 25 (25-30), while it was 30 (30-35) in the InterTAN group (p<0.001). No nail protrusion was observed in the InterTAN group, whereas nail protrusion was observed in 12 patients (31.6%) in the Talon PFN group (p<0.001). Nail jamming was observed in two (5.3%) patients in the Talon PFN group, while none was observed in the InterTAN group (p<0.07). Conclusion In ITF fractures, the InterTAN nail is a more reliable implant. The shorter surgery time, reduced radiation exposure, and more minimally invasive nature of the Talon PFN might be preferred for geriatric patient populations with comorbidities where prolonged anesthesia could elevate mortality risks or for fractures of two or three pieces (Evans-Jansen Type 1 and Type 2). However, for more unstable fractures (Evans-Jensen Type 3) and in the active elderly patient group, we recommend the use of the InterTAN nail.

Clinical observation and finite element analysis of femoral stable interlocking intramedullary nail in intertrochanteric fractures

PURPOSE

This study was designed to compare clinical outcomes of the femoral stable interlocking intramedullary nail (FSIIN) with proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures (OTA 31A1 + A2).

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed a registered sample of 74 intertrochanteric fractures (OTA 31A1 + A2) surgically treated using FSIIN (n = 36) or PFNA (n = 38) from January 2015 to December 2021. The intra-operative variables (operation time, fluoroscopy time, intra-operative blood loss, length of incision) and fracture healing time were compared between the two groups in this study. Harris hip score (HHS) and visual analog scale (VAS) were used to evaluate the functional states. At the last follow-up, the incidence of related complications in patients was calculated. Eventually, the 3D finite element model was established to analyze the stress of FSIIN and PFNA.

RESULTS

The distribution of all basic characteristics was similar between the two groups (p > 0.05). The operation time, fluoroscopy time, intra-operative blood loss, and length of incision were significantly decreased in the FSIIN group (p < 0.001). The FSIIN group had a shorter fracture healing time than the PFNA group (p < 0.001). There is no significant difference between the two groups in the Harris and VAS (p > 0.05). The incidences of post-operative anaemia, electrolyte imbalance, varus malalignment, and thigh pain were significantly lower in FSIIN than in PFNA groups (all p < 0.05). The finite element results show that the stress shielding effect of FSIIN is smaller.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study revealed that FSIIN seemed to be superior to PFNA in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures (OTA 31A1 + A2) due to less surgical damage and shorter fracture healing time.

Optimal surgical methods to treat intertrochanteric fracture: a Bayesian network meta-analysis based on 36 randomized controlled trials

Background

There are several surgical methods to treat intertrochanteric fracture: dynamic hip screw (DHS), compression hip screw (CHS), percutaneous compression plate (PCCP), Medoff sliding plate, less invasive stabilization system (LISS), Gamma nail, proximal femoral nail (PFN), and proximal femoral nail anti-rotating (PFNA). We therefore conducted a network meta-analysis to compare eight surgical interventions, including DHS, CHS, PCCP, Medoff sliding plate, LISS, Gamma nail, PFN, and PFNA, to provide the optimal surgical intervention for intertrochanteric fracture.

Methods

An electronic search of 4 databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Web of Science) from inception to July 2020. Two or more of the eight surgical interventions, including the DHS, CHS, PCCP, Medoff sliding plate, LISS, Gamma nail, PFN, and PFNA, for intertrochanteric fracture were included. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias (ROB) tool. Network meta-analysis was conducted by using R-3.5.1 software with the help of package “gemtc”. The odd ratios (ORs) with 95% credibility interval (CrI) were used to assess complications and standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% CrI to calculate the continuous outcomes (operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and Harris hip score). Surfaces under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) were used to rank the intervention.

Results

A total of 36 RCTs were included in this study. The results of this network meta-analysis showed that, compared with the CHS and DHS group, PFNA exhibited a beneficial role in reducing the blood loss (SMD, 152.50; 95% CrI, 72.93 to 232.45; and SMD, 184.40; 95% CrI, 132.99 to 235.90, respectively). PFNA achieved the lowest value for the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) for the blood loss (SURCA = 0.072) and highest of Harris hip score (SURCA = 0.912). PCCP may have the lowest probability of the operative time (SURCA = 0.095). There were no significant differences among the eight surgical procedures in complications.

Conclusion

PFNA technique is the optimal treatment method for intertrochanteric fracture. Larger, longitudinal RCTs addressing current limitations, including sources of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision, are needed to provide more robust and consistent evidence.