| Objective: Reviewing the effect of surgical treatment of elder intertrochantericfracture.Comparing the effect of treatment of intertrochanteric fractures byproximalfemoral nail (PFN) and proximal femoral nail anti-rotation(PFNA) Methods:From January2009to March2011,choosing22cases with PFN fixation (A group, theaverage age of77.6years) and choosing16caseswith PFNA fixation (B group, the averageage of79.2years).Comparing the two groups from this aspects: length of surgicalincision,operative time, blood loss and x-ray exposure times,postoperative complications,follow-up time of patients with fracture healing, the use of Harris hip score standardevaluation of hips function, assessment of clinical effects of two surgical procedures.Results: The average follow-up8months (6-13months), two groups have receivedclinical healing. A group: the average surgical incision was6.9±1.2cm, the averageoperation time was87±16min, the average intra-operative blood loss was213±68ml, theaverage x-ray exposure times was11.2±1.7, the average fracture healing time was12.5weeks, Harris score high rate of90.2%, anti-rotation nail cutting—out in1case, nooccurrence of hip varus. B group: the average surgical incision was7.2±1.3cm, theaverage operative time was77±15min, the average intra-operative blood loss was174±42ml, the average x-ray exposure times was8.7±1.3, the average fracture healing timewas12.3weeks,Harris score high rate of91.4%, no similar complications. The averageoperative time, the average blood loss, and the average x-ray exposure times wasstatistically significant (p<0.05), the average length of surgical incision,fracturehealingicant difference in quality (p>0.05).Conclusion: PFN and PFNA are both good choices for treatment ofintertrochantericfracture.Compared with PFN,PFNA have more advantages including shorter operation time，blood loss and shorter x-ray exposure times.Especially for the elderpatients withOsteoporosis fracture. |
PDF Full Text Request