Fracture classification of femoral trochanteric fracture is usually based on plain X-ray. However, complications such as delayed union, non-union, and cut out are seen in stable fracture on X-ray. In this study, fracture was classified by 3D-CT and relationship to X-ray classification was investigated.

48 femoral trochanteric fractures (15 males, 33 female, average age: 82.6) treated with PFNA-II were investigated.

Fracture was classified to 2part, 3part(5 subgroups), and 4part with combination of 4 fragments in CT; Head (H), Greater trochanter (G), Lesser trochanter (L), and Shaft (S). 5 subgroups of 3 part fracture were (1) H+G (S: small fragment) + L-S, (2) H + G (B:big fragment) + L-S, (3) H + G-L + S, (4) H + G (W:whole) + S, and (5) H + L + G-S. Numbers of each group were as follows; 2 part: 11, 3 part (1) : 7, 3 part (2) : 12, 3 part (3) : 10, 3 part (4) : 2, 3 part (5) : 3, 4 part : 3. 3 part (3), (4), (5) and 4 part are considered as unstable, however, 6 cases in these groups were classified in A1–1 or A1–2 stable fracture in AO classification. 10 fractures in Evans and 5 fractures in Jensen classification classified as stable were unstable in CT evaluation.

It is sometimes very difficult to classify the femoral trochanteric fracture by plain X-ray. Classification with 3D-CT is very useful to distinguish which fracture is stable or unstable.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical results of a newly designed prosthesis to replace the body of the talus in patients with aseptic necrosis. Between 1999 and 2006, 22 tali in 22 patients were replaced with a ceramic prosthesis. A total of eight patients were treated with the first-generation prosthesis, incorporating a peg to fix into the retained neck and head of the talus, and the remaining 14 were treated with the second-generation prosthesis, which does not have the peg. The clinical results were assessed by the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society ankle/hindfoot scale.

The mean follow-up was 98 months (18 to 174). The clinical results of the first-generation prostheses were excellent in three patients, good in one, fair in three and poor in one. There were, however, radiological signs of loosening, prompting a change in design. The clinical results of the second-generation prostheses were excellent in three patients, good in five, fair in four and poor in two, with more favourable radiological appearances. Revision was required using a total talar implant in four patients, two in each group.

Although the second-generation prosthesis produced better results, we cannot recommend the use of a talar body prosthesis. We now recommend the use of a total talar implant in these patients.

INTRODUCTION

Short femoral nail is the most popular instrumentation for femoral trochanteric fractures. PFNA is in widely use and good results are reported. In these papers, fracture classification and evaluation of surgical results were based on plain X-ray. However, some cases of delayed union, non-union, and blade cut out showed no critical problems in immediate postoperative X-ray. Cause of these complications was not able to solve in X-ray analysis. CT scan provides more information about fracture pattern and position of nail and blade. CT analysis is likely to solve the cause of these complications.