Kuwahara Yutaro, Takemoto Genta, Fukuoka Hiroshi, Mitsuya So, Yamauchi Ken-Ichi
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Toyohashi Municipal Hospital, 50 Aza Hachiken Nishi, Aotake-Cho, Toyohashi, Aichi, 441-8570, Japan.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2025 Jul 15;26(1):683. doi: 10.1186/s12891-025-08901-8.
Unstable trochanteric fractures (AO types A2 or A3) are reported to be risk factors for mechanical failure such as screw cut-out. This study aimed to compare the incidence of implant related complications and functional outcomes between cement augmentation and non-augmentation.
Patients at a single institution aged > 60 years who underwent fixation using the trochanteric femoral nail advanced system (TFNA) with or without cement augmentation from 2020 to 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. We evaluated reduction quality and screw position on immediate postoperative radiographs, the occurrence of screw cut-out, and Parker's mobility score (PMS) as functional outcomes.
We evaluated 140 patients in the non-augmentation group and 93 patients in the augmentation group. The mean follow-up period was 13.6 ± 5.7 months. The mean age was 86.0 ± 8.1 years in the non-augmentation and 85.2 ± 8.3 years in the cement augmentation group. Patient demographics, including fracture type, were similar in both groups. The screw cut-out rate was seven out of 140 patients (5.0%) in the non-augmentation group, whereas no patients in the augmentation group experienced screw cut-out, and the difference was significant (p = 0.044). All cases which occurred screw cut-out were associated with postoperative poor reduction quality and screw malposition. The mean PMS at the last follow-up was 4.0 ± 3.0 in the non-augmentation group and 4.7 ± 2.7 in the augmentation group, and the difference was not significant (p = 0.187).
Cement augmentation showed a significant lower screw cut-out rate compared with non-augmentation. This technique could be a more favorable option for osteoporotic unstable trochanteric fractures.
据报道,不稳定型转子间骨折(AO分型A2或A3)是诸如螺钉穿出等机械性失效的危险因素。本研究旨在比较骨水泥强化与非强化治疗在植入物相关并发症发生率和功能结局方面的差异。
对2020年至2023年在单一机构接受股骨转子间钉高级系统(TFNA)固定且有或无骨水泥强化治疗的60岁以上患者进行回顾性分析。我们在术后即刻X线片上评估复位质量和螺钉位置、螺钉穿出的发生情况,并将帕克活动评分(PMS)作为功能结局进行评估。
我们评估了非强化组140例患者和强化组93例患者。平均随访期为13.6±5.7个月。非强化组平均年龄为86.0±8.1岁,骨水泥强化组为85.2±8.3岁。两组患者的人口统计学特征,包括骨折类型,相似。非强化组140例患者中有7例(5.0%)发生螺钉穿出,而强化组无患者发生螺钉穿出,差异有统计学意义(p = 0.044)。所有发生螺钉穿出的病例均与术后复位质量差和螺钉位置不良有关。末次随访时,非强化组平均PMS为4.0±3.0,强化组为4.7±2.7,差异无统计学意义(p = 0.187)。
与非强化治疗相比,骨水泥强化治疗的螺钉穿出率显著更低。对于骨质疏松性不稳定型转子间骨折,该技术可能是更有利的选择。