Reduced cutout for reverse oblique intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with trochanteric fixation advanced (TFN-A) nail compared to the short gamma-3 nail

BACKGROUND

Reverse oblique fractures (AO/OTA 31-A3) account for 5-23% of all intertrochanteric fractures and are challenging to manage. The Gamma 3-Proximal Femoral Nail (GPFN) and the Trochanteric Fixation Nail Advanced (TFNA) are two common cephalomedullary systems used to treat this fracture. No study has reported on outcomes with the TFN-A for reverse oblique fractures. This study aimed to compare outcomes and complication rates in patients with reverse oblique fractures, treated with either TFNA or GPFN.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 203 patients with reverse oblique fractures (137 in the GPFN group and 66 in the TFNA group), were treated in our institution between June 2010 and May 2019. Data was collected on postoperative radiological variables including screw or blade location, and tip-apex distance (TAD). Data were also collected for non-orthopaedic complication rates and orthopaedic complications. A sub-group analysis was additionally performed for different nail lengths.

RESULTS

We found no significant difference in the overall rate of complications and revisions between the two groups. Patients treated with the 235 mm TFN-A nail sustained lower rates of cutout, compared to 180 mm GPFN (GPFN: 6% TFN-A: 0%, p = 0.043). The frequency of revision surgeries and malunions/non-unions did not differ significantly between the two groups and additionally showed no difference in the subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSION

The 235 mm TFN-A was associated with lower rates of cut-out compared to the short GPFN for reverse oblique intertrochanteric fractures. Future well-designed prospective studies are warranted to investigate the role of the TFN-A in improving outcomes for such fractures.

Expandable Proximal Femoral Nail versus Gamma Proximal Femoral Nail for the treatment of hip reverse oblique fractures

BACKGROUND

Reverse oblique intertrochanteric fractures are classified by the AO/OTA as 31A3 and account for 2-23% of all trochanteric fractures. The Gamma 3-Proximal Femoral Nail (GPFN) and the Expendable Proximal Femoral Nail (EPFN) are among the various devises used to treat this fracture. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes and complication rates in patients with AO/OTA 31A1-3 fractures, treated by either a GPFN or an EPFN.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 67 patients (40 in the GPFN group and 27 in the EPFN group, average age 78.8 years) were treated in our institution between July 2008 and February 2016. Data on postoperative radiological variables, including peg location and tip-apex distance (TAD), as well as orthopedic complications, such as union rate, surgical wound infection and cut-outs rates were also recorded, along with the incidence of non-orthopedic complications and more surgical data. Functional results were evaluated and quantified using the Modified Harris Hip Score (MHHS) and by the Short Form 12 Mental Health Composite questionnaire (SF-12 MHC) in order to assess the quality of life.

RESULTS

The total prevalence of postoperative orthopedic complications including postoperative infection showed a significant difference with a p-value of 0.016 in favor of the EPFN group. Nonetheless, the frequency of revision did not differ between the two groups, being 0.134. The main orthopedic complication in both groups was head cut-out of the GPFN lag screw and the EPFN expendable peg, which was 20% and 7.4%, respectively, and required a revision surgery using a long nail or total hip replacement (THR). However, the average TAD did not significantly differ between groups which might be due to a relatively low cohort to reach a significant difference. Nonunion rate of 5% occurred solely in the GPFN group, with similar results of intraoperative open reduction between both groups. The EPFN group achieved better scores in both questionnaires (p = 0.027 and p = 0.046, respectively). Both the MHHS and SF-12 MCS values significantly differed between groups, with the EPFN group achieving better scores than the GPFN group in both questionnaires (p = 0.027 and p < 0.05, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

According to this study, the EPFN yields better results in comparison with the GPFN, with relatively less complications rate, for the treatment of unstable reverse oblique pertrochanteric fracture. In light of this results, we conclude that the EPFN might be as good as GPFN for the treatment of reverse oblique intertrochanteric fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III retrospective study. The local institutional review board of the Tel Aviv Medical Center approved this study and all the surgeries were done exclusively in this institution.

A Rare Case of Reverse Oblique Ulnar Head and Neck Fracture

Isolated distal ulnar head and neck fractures are rare. Undisplaced fractures are normally treated non-operatively. We report a case of a reverse oblique ulnar head and neck fracture, which despite the initial undisplaced configuration, was unstable and displaced over the subsequent weeks. We believe that, though this particular fracture pattern could have been treated in a cast, it requires careful follow up, especially early on, or to undergo early internal fixation.