• Arch Orthop Trauma Surg · Dec 2020

    Multicenter Study

    Cementation: for better or worse? Interim results of a multi-centre cohort study using a fenestrated spiral blade cephalomedullary device for pertrochanteric fractures in the elderly.

    • Yee Dennis K H DKH Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, 102 Pok Fu Lam Road, Hong Kong, China. yeedns@gmail.com., Will Lau, Kwok Leung Tiu, Frankie Leung, Evan Fang, Jon Paolo S Pineda, and Christian Fang.
    • Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, 102 Pok Fu Lam Road, Hong Kong, China. yeedns@gmail.com.
    • Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2020 Dec 1; 140 (12): 1957-1964.

    IntroductionCephallomedullary nail fixation is currently the most popular treatment for pertrochanteric fractures. Despite continuous improvement in implant design, fixation failures still occur in a concerning number of cases. This study aims to evaluate the effect of cement augmentation of the new-generation Trochanteric Femoral Nail Advanced (TFNA) perforated spiral blade on complications including fixation failure in the elderly population.Materials And MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated 107 patients aged 65 + treated for pertrochanteric fractures via TFNA between 2015 and 2019 based on whether cementation was used. Baseline demographics, fracture classifications, and reduction quality were compared. Patients with a follow-up of at least 6 months were analyzed for the primary outcome of fixation failure. All patients, regardless of loss to follow-up within 6 months, were analyzed for other complications including mortality.ResultsSeventy-six patients (47 cemented, 29 non-cemented) had a minimum follow-up of 6 months (mean 13 months). There were no statistically significant differences between the two treatment groups in terms of patient demographics, ASA or AO/OTA fracture classification, reduction quality, or length of follow-up. There was a lower rate of fixation failure in the cement-augmented (CA) group versus the non-cement-augmented (NCA) group (2.1% vs 13.8%; p = 0.047). No cut-out or cut-through was observed in the CA group. Seven patients had adverse intraoperative events, with a significantly higher rate of fixation failure in these patients (40% vs 2.8%; p = 0.00). There were no statistically significant differences in 30-day mortality (6.3% CA vs 4.3% NCA; p = 0.632) or 3-month mortality (9.5% CA vs 12.8% NCA; p = 0.589).ConclusionsCementation of TFNA blades may decrease risk of fixation failure, however, the surgeon must be aware of potential complications such as cement leakage into the hip joint and be able to manage them as they arise.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.