Adams C I, Robinson C M, Court-Brown C M, McQueen M M
The Orthopaedic Trauma Unit, The Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Scotland.
J Orthop Trauma. 2001 Aug;15(6):394-400. doi: 10.1097/00005131-200108000-00003.
To compare the surgical complications and functional outcome of the Gamma nail intramedullary fixation device versus the Richards sliding hip screw and plate device in intertrochanteric femoral fractures.
A prospective, randomised controlled clinical trial with observer blinding.
A regional teaching hospital in the United Kingdom.
All patients admitted from the local population with intertrochanteric fractured femurs were included. There were 400 patients entered into the study and 399 followed-up to one year or death.
The devices were assigned by randomization to either a short-type Gamma nail (203 patients) or a Richard's-type sliding hip screw and plate (197 patients).
The main surgical outcome measurements were fixation failure and reoperation. A functional outcome of pain, mobility status, and range of movement were assessed until one year.
The requirement for revision in the Gamma nail group was twelve (6%); for Richard's group, eight (4%). This was not statistically different (p = 0.29; odds ratio, 1.48 [0.59-3.7]). A subcapital femoral fracture occurred in the Richard's group. Femoral shaft fractures occurred with four in the Gamma nail group (2%) and none in the Richard's group (p = 0.13). Three required revision to another implant. Lag-screw cut-out occurred in eight patients in the gamma nail group (4%) and four in the Richard's group (2%). This was not statistically significant (p = 0.37; odds ratio, 2.29 [0.6-9.0]). The development of other postoperative complications was the same in both groups. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of early or long-term functional status at one year.
The use of an intramedullary device in the treatment of intertrochanteric femoral fractures is still associated with a higher but nonsignificant risk of postoperative complications. Routine use of the Gamma nail in this type of fracture cannot be recommended over the current standard treatment of dynamic hip screw and plate.
比较Gamma钉髓内固定装置与Richards滑动髋螺钉及钢板装置治疗股骨转子间骨折的手术并发症及功能结果。
一项前瞻性、随机对照临床试验,观察者设盲。
英国一家地区教学医院。
纳入所有当地因股骨转子间骨折入院的患者。400名患者进入研究,399名随访至1年或死亡。
通过随机分组将患者分为短型Gamma钉组(203例)或Richard型滑动髋螺钉及钢板组(197例)。
主要手术观察指标为内固定失败和再次手术。评估至1年时的疼痛、活动状态及活动范围等功能结果。
Gamma钉组翻修需求为12例(6%);Richard组为8例(4%)。差异无统计学意义(p = 0.29;比值比,1.48 [0.59 - 3.7])。Richard组发生1例股骨颈下骨折。Gamma钉组发生4例股骨干骨折(2%),Richard组无股骨干骨折发生(p = 0.13)。其中3例需翻修为其他内固定物。Gamma钉组8例(4%)出现拉力螺钉穿出,Richard组4例(2%)出现拉力螺钉穿出。差异无统计学意义(p = 0.37;比值比,2.29 [0.6 - 9.0])。两组其他术后并发症的发生情况相同。两组在1年时的早期或长期功能状态无差异。
使用髓内装置治疗股骨转子间骨折仍存在较高但无显著意义的术后并发症风险。对于此类骨折,不推荐常规使用Gamma钉而非目前的动力髋螺钉及钢板标准治疗方法。