[Comparison of curative effect between percutaneous compression plate and cannulated compression screw in the treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures in young and middle-aged patients].

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of percutaneous compression plate and cannulated compression screw in the treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures in young and middle-aged patients.

METHODS

From January 2015 to July 2020, 68 young and middle-aged patients with displaced femoral neck fracture were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 31 cases were fixed by percutaneous compression plate (PCCP), and 37 cases were fixed by cannulated compression screw (CCS). General data such as gender, age, cause of injury, comorbidities, fracture classification and cause of injury of two groups were collected. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, full weight bearing time, fracture healing time, visual analogue scale(VAS), Harris hip score and complications were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

Patients in both groups were followed up for more than 2 years. There were no significant differences in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, fracture reduction quality, hospital stay and VAS between two groups. The fracture healing time in PCCP group was significantly shorter than that in CCS group (=-4.404, =0.000). The complete weight bearing time of PCCP group was significantly shorter than that of CCS group (=-9.011, =0.000). Harris score of hip joint in PCCP group was better than that in CCS group 2 years after operation (=0.002). Complications occurred in 3 cases (9.68%) in PCCP group, while 11 cases (29.72%) in CCS group, with a statistically significant difference (=0.042).

CONCLUSION

Both PCCP and CCS can be used for the treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures in young and middle-aged people. Compared with CCS, PCCP fixation can achieve shorter fracture healing time and create conditions for early full weight bearing. PCCP results in higher hip score and lower complications.