The primary aim of this study was to compare surgical methods (sliding hip screw (SHS) vs intramedullary nailing (IMN)) for trochanteric hip fracture in relation to death within 120 days after surgery and return to independent living. The secondary aim was to assess whether the associations between surgical method and death or ability to return to independent living varied depending on fracture subtype or other patient characteristics. A total of 27,530 individuals from the Swedish Hip Fracture Register RIKSHÖFT (SHR) aged ≥ 70 years, admitted to hospital between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2019 with trochanteric hip fracture, were included. Within this cohort, 12,041 individuals lived independently at baseline, had follow-up information in the SHR, and were thus investigated for return to independent living. Death within 120 days after surgery was analyzed using Cox regression with SHS as reference and adjusted for age and fracture type. Return to independent living was analyzed using logistic regression adjusted for age and fracture type. Analyses were repeated after stratification by fracture type, age, and sex.Aims
Methods
Background: The treatment of trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures is still controversial. In Norway the most commonly used implant for these fractures is the
The
400 patients with a trochanteric hip fracture were randomised to fixation with either a 220mm long Targon PF (proximal femoral) nail or a
Extracapsular Hip Fractures (EHF's) are a significant health burden on healthcare services. Optimal treatment is controversial with conflicting evidence being reported. Currently treatment is undertaken with Intramedullary Nail (IMN) or Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) constructs with a recent increase in IMN use (1). This study aims to conduct a systematic review of Randomised Control Trials published between 2020 and 2023 with particular focus on patient demographics and holistic patient outcomes. Using a unified search-protocol, RCT's published between 2020 and 2023 were collected from CENTRAL, PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE. Rayyan software screened duplicates. Using the CASP and Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool papers were critically examined twice, and Blood Loss, Infection and Mobility described the patient journey. Patient demographics were recorded and were contrasted with geographically diverse cohort studies to compare population differences. Parametric tests were used to determine significance levels between population demographics, namely Age and Sex. Eleven papers were included, representing 908 patients (436 Male). The mean age for patients was 64.39. There was considerable risk of bias in 7/11 studies owing to the randomization process and the recording of data. Four Cohort studies were selected for comparison representing 14314 patients. Mean age was significantly different between Cohort Studies and RCT's (Independent T-Test, df 13, t=7.8, p = <0.001, mean difference = 19.251, 95% CI = 13.888, 24.613). This was also true for sex ratios included in the studies (df 13, t = -2.268, p = 0.024, Mean Difference = -0.4884, 95% CI = -0.9702, -0.0066). To conclude, RCT's published in the post COVID-19 era are not representative of patient demographics. This has the potential to provide inaccurate information for implant selection. Additionally further research must be conducted in how to better improve RCT patient inclusion so as to be more representative of patients whilst balancing the risks of operations.
Intracapsular neck of femur fractures are one of the most common injuries seen in Orthopaedics. When the fracture is amenable to internal fixation there are 2 main treatment options, namely multiple cannulated hip screws (MCS) and 2-hole sliding hip screws (SHS). In this retrospective study we examine the outcomes associated with these two methods of internal fixation. At present there is little consensus regarding which treatment should be used 161 patients were found to have suffered intracapsular neck of femur fracture treated with either SHS or MCS fixation over a 5 year period from April 2009 to April 2014, allowing at least 1 year follow up following injury. The patients imaging and clinical notes were then reviewed to ascertain the outcome of their treatment and any complications.Background
Methods
Appropriate surgical management of hip fractures has major clinical and economic consequences. Recently IMN use has increased compared to SHS constructs, despite no clear evidence demonstrating superiority of outcome. We therefore set out to provide further evidence about the clinical and economic implications of implant choice when considering hip fracture fixation strategies. A retrospective cohort study using Scottish hip fracture audit (SHFA) data was performed for the period 2016–2022. Patients ≥50 with a hip fracture and treated with IMN or SHS constructs at Scottish Hospitals were included. Comparative analyses, including adjustment for confounders, were performed utilising Multivariable logistic regression for dichotomous outcomes and Mann-Whitney-U tests for non-parametric data. A sub-group analysis was also performed focusing on AO-A1/A2 configurations which utilised additional regional data. Cost differences in Length of Stay (LOS) were calculated using defined costs from the NHS Scotland Costs book. In all analyses p<0.05 denoted significance. 13638 records were included (72% female). 9867 received a SHS (72%). No significant differences were identified in 30 or 60-day survival (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.05, 95%CI 0.90–1.23; p=0.532), (OR 1.10, 95%CI 0.97–1.24; p=0.138) between SHS and IMN's. There was however a significantly lower early mobilisation rate with IMN vs SHS (OR 0.64, 95%CI 0.59–0.70; p<0.001), and lower likelihood of discharge to domicile by day-30 post-admission (OR 0.77, 95%CI 0.71–0.84; p<0.001). Acute and overall, LOS were significantly lower for SHS vs IMN (11 vs 12 days and 20 vs 24 days respectively; p<0.001). Findings were similar across a sub-group analysis of 559 AO A1/A2 fracture configurations. Differences in LOS potentially increases costs by £1230 per-patient, irrespective of the higher costs of IMN's v SHS. Appropriate SHS use is associated with early mobilisation, reduced LOS and likely with reduced cost of treatment. Further research exploring potential reasons for the identified differences in early mobilisation are warranted.
Controversy exists whether to treat unstable pertrochanteric hip fractures with either intramedullary or extramedullary devices. A prospective randomised control trial was performed to compare the outcome of unstable pertrochanteric hip fractures stabilised with either a sliding hip screw (SHS) or Long Gamma Nail (LGN). The hypothesis was that there is no difference in outcome between the two modes of treatment. Over a four year period, 210 patients presenting with an unstable pertrochanteric hip fracture (AO/OTA 31 A2.1/A2.2/A2.3) were recruited into the study. Eligible patients were randomised on admission to either LGN or SHS. Follow-up was arranged for three, six, and twelve months. Primary outcome measures were implant failure and implant ‘cut-out’. Secondary measures included mortality, length of hospital stay, and EuroQol outcome score. Five patients required revision surgery for implant cutout, of which three were LGNs and two were SHSs (no significant difference). There was a significant correlation between tip apex distance and the need for revision surgery. There were no incidences of implant failure or deep infection. Mortality rates between the two groups were similar when corrected for mini mental score. There was no difference between the two groups with respect to tip apex distance, hospital length of stay, blood transfusion requirement, and EuroQol outcome score. The sliding hip screw remains the gold standard in the treatment of unstable pertrochanteric fractures of the proximal femur.
Hip fracture is a common serious injury in the elderly. Between 1982 and 1998 the number of hip fractures reported annually in Scotland in patients over 55 years rose from 4,000 to 5,700. The optimum method of treatment for the various fracture types remains in contention. We compare outcome measures between displaced, intracapsular fractures in patients over 70 years fixed with cannulated screws and sliding hip screw with side plate. Between 1998 and 2005 a total of 30,482 patients were reviewed by the Scottish Hip Fracture Audit (SHFA). Of these 15,823(53.3% of the total) had sustained intracapsular fractures. 13,587 of these occurred in patients aged 70 or over. Of these 2,428 had undisplaced and 11,159 displaced fractures. Chi test statistical analysis compare outcome measures in this group of displaced intracapsular fractures with respect to aspects of early failure. 534(3.9%) of patients were treated conservatively. 509 (4.7%) fractures were fixed using cannulated screws and 499 (4.6%) using a sliding hip screw. Readmission within 120 days for any cause occurred in 62 patients(14.1%) treated with cannulated screw fixation and in 63 patients(15.7%) for those treated with a sliding hip screw(P=0.509). Of these 36 patients(8.2%) in the former and 23 patients(5.7%) in the latter group were readmitted for complications related to hip fracture(P=0.033). Mortality within this period included 69 patients(13.5%) in the CS and 98(19.6%) in the SHS group. In terms of re-operation within 120 days of the original admission, 53 patients(10.6%) receiving cannulated screws compared to 24 patients(4.8%) treated with a sliding hip screw requiring further surgery(P=0.0006). The fracture was seen to displace in 12(22.6%) patients originally treated with cannulated screws compared to 6 patients(25%) treated with sliding hip screw(P=0.156). More significantly the fixation device was seen to have migrated in 24(45.3%) of the cannulated screw as compared to 7(29.2%) patients in the sliding hip screw group(P=0.002). Periprosthetic fractures were recorded in 4(7.5%) of the former and 3(12.5%) in the latter group(P=0.708). Wound infection was higher in the SHS group(2 patients) as compared to the screw fixation group(1 patient)(P=0.565). Statistical analysis demonstrates a dramatic difference exists between these 2 fixation types in terms of re-operation within 120 days of the original admission for which published literature has previously only recorded biomechanical, in vitro comparisons. Data regarding specific implant factors such as number of screws, position, configuration, starting point, thread length and use of washers in cannulated screws, and position, tapping, supplementary screw and compression screw in sliding hip screws was not recorded and may be considered to bias our results.
Controversy exists whether to treat unstable pertrochanteric hip fractures with either intra-medullary or extra-medullary devices. A prospective randomised control trial was performed to compare the outcome of unstable pertrochanteric hip fractures stabilised with either a sliding hip screw or long Gamma Nail. The hypothesis was that there is no difference in outcome between the two modes of treatment. Over a four year period, 210 patients presenting with an unstable pertrochanteric hip fracture (AO/OTA 31 A2) were recruited into the study. Eligible patients were randomised on admission to either long Gamma Nail or sliding hip screw. Follow-up was arranged for three, six, and twelve months. Primary outcome measures were implant failure or ‘cut-out’. Secondary measures included mortality, length of hospital stay, transfusion rate, change in mobility and residence, and EuroQol outcome score. Five patients required revision surgery for implant cut-out (2.5%), of which three were long Gamma Nails and two were sliding hip screws (no significant difference). There were no incidences of implant failure or deep infection. Tip apex distance was found to correlate with implant cut-out. There was no statistically significant difference in either the EuroQol outcome scores or mortality rates between the two groups when corrected for mini mental score. There was no difference in transfusion rates, length of hospital stay, and change in mobility or residence. There was a clear cost difference between the implants. The sliding hip screw remains the gold standard in the treatment of unstable pertrochanteric fractures of the proximal femur.
The treatment of trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures remains controversial, and new implants are constantly being developed trying to improve outcome and minimize the number of complications in these fractures. In Norway the Sliding Hip Screw(SHS), with or without a Trochanteric Stabilizing Plate (TSP), is still the most commonly used implant, but worldwide nailing of these fractures is increasing. This trend, however, has not been supported by documentation of better clinical results compared to the SHS in well designed studies. Therefore, in the present study we compared the recently launched Trigen Intertan nail (Smith and Nephew) with the SHS in the treatment of trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures. In a prospective, randomized multicenter study with 697 patients, we compared the Trigen Intertan nail with the SHS regarding postoperative pain, functional mobility, complications, and reoperation rates. Patients older than 60 years with trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures were included in 5 hospitals. At day 5, and 3 and 12 months postoperatively, pain was measured using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and the Timed Up and Go-test (TUG-test) was performed to evaluate functional mobility. Complications and reoperations were recorded at discharge, and after 3 and 12 months.Introduction
Patients and Methods
Patients with A1 and A2 trochanteric hip fractures represent a substantial proportion of trauma caseload, and national guidelines recommend that sliding hip screws (SHS) should be used for these injuries. Despite this, intramedullary nails (IMNs) are routinely implanted in many hospitals, at extra cost and with unproven patient outcome benefit. We have used data from the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) to examine the use of SHS and IMN for A1 and A2 hip fractures at a national level, and to define the cost implications of management decisions that run counter to national guidelines. We used the NHFD to identify all operations for fixation of trochanteric fractures in England and Wales between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2021. A uniform price band from each of three hip fracture implant manufacturers was used to set cost implications alongside variation in implant use.Aims
Methods
Objectives. The
Fractures of the proximal femur at the level of the lesser trochanter (reversed and transverse fracture lines, Evans classification type II, AO classification 31. A3 fractures) are known to have an increased risk of fixation failure. 53 patients with such a fracture were randomised to have the fracture fixed with either an intramedullary nail (220 mm Targon Proximal Femoral nail) or a