These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Extra-articular proximal femur fracture in the elderly--dynamic hip screw or intramedullary hip screw for fracture management?].
    Author: Wagner R, Weckbach A, Sellmair U, Blattert T.
    Journal: Langenbecks Arch Chir Suppl Kongressbd; 1996; 113():963-6. PubMed ID: 9102039.
    Abstract:
    Over a 6-year period we treated 119 pertrochanteric fractures using dynamic hip screws (DHS). During the following 3 years we stabilized 112 per-, sub- and intertrochanteric, as well as "trochanter-associated" fractures by means of intramedullary hip screws (IMHS) or gamma nails (GN). Within comparable patient groups we encountered the following complications: DHS vs IMHS/GN: secondary varus malalignment of the collum femoris with "cut out": 1.7% vs. 1.8%; secondary varus malalignment without "cut out": 0.8% vs. 1.8%; infections: 5.0% vs. 2.7%; hematomas needing revision operations: 2.5% vs. 0%; torn out plate: 1.7% vs. 0%; intraoperative fissures of the shaft: 0% vs. 1.8%; intraoperative perforations of the shaft: 0% vs. 0.9%. Thus, the rate of reoperation for complications within the DHS series was 11.8%, while the rate within the IMHS/GN series was 6.3%. For stable pertrochanteric fractures we therefore acknowledge DHS as the ideal implant in our opinion, while for all other extraarticular proximal fractures of the femur we recommend IMHS or GN.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]