López-Hualda Alvaro, Arruti-Pérez Elsa, Bebea-Zamorano Fátima N, Sosa-Reina María Dolores, Villafañe Jorge Hugo, Martínez-Martin Javier
Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology Service, Hospital Universitario Fundación Alcorcon, 28922 Alcorcón, Spain.
Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Sports Sciences, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Calle Tajo s/n, 28670 Villaviciosa de Odón, Spain.
Geriatrics (Basel). 2023 Jun 8;8(3):66. doi: 10.3390/geriatrics8030066.
The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes, complications, and mortality of patients with intertrochanteric hip fracture treated with dynamic hip screw (DHS) vs. trochanteric fixation nail advance (TFNA).
We evaluated 152 patients with intertrochanteric fractures concerning age, sex, comorbidity, Charlson Index, preoperative gait, OTA/AO classification, time from fracture to surgery, blood loss, amount of blood replacement, changes in gait, full weight-bearing at hospital discharge, complications, and mortality. The final indicators encompassed the adverse effects linked to implants, postoperative complications, clinical healing or bone healing duration, and functional score.
The study included a total of 152 patients, out of which 78 (51%) received DHS treatment and 74 (49%) received TFNA treatment. The results of this study show that the TFNA group demonstrated superiority ( < 0.001). However, it should be noted that the TFNA group had a higher frequency of the most unstable fractures (AO 31 A3, < 0.005). Full weight-bearing at discharge also decreased in patients with more unstable fractures ( = 0.005) and severe dementia ( = 0.027). Mortality was higher in the DHS group; however, a longer time from diagnosis to surgery was also observed in this group ( < 0.005).
The TFNA group has shown a higher success rate in achieving full weight-bearing at hospital discharge when treating trochanteric hip fractures. This makes it the preferred choice for treating unstable fractures in this region of the hip. Additionally, it is important to note that a longer time to surgery is associated with increased mortality in patients with hip fractures.
本研究旨在比较动力髋螺钉(DHS)与股骨转子间固定推进髓内钉(TFNA)治疗股骨转子间骨折患者的临床疗效、并发症及死亡率。
我们评估了152例股骨转子间骨折患者的年龄、性别、合并症、查尔森指数、术前步态、OTA/AO分类、骨折至手术的时间、失血量、输血量、步态变化、出院时完全负重情况、并发症及死亡率。最终指标包括与植入物相关的不良反应、术后并发症、临床愈合或骨愈合时间以及功能评分。
本研究共纳入152例患者,其中78例(51%)接受DHS治疗,74例(49%)接受TFNA治疗。本研究结果显示TFNA组具有优越性(<0.001)。然而,应注意的是,TFNA组最不稳定骨折(AO 31 A3)的发生率更高(<0.005)。骨折更不稳定的患者(=0.005)和患有严重痴呆的患者(=0.027)出院时的完全负重情况也较差。DHS组的死亡率更高;然而,该组从诊断到手术的时间也更长(<0.005)。
在治疗股骨转子间骨折时,TFNA组在出院时实现完全负重方面显示出更高的成功率。这使其成为治疗该髋部区域不稳定骨折的首选。此外,需要注意的是,手术时间延长与髋部骨折患者死亡率增加相关。