Comparison of Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation (PFNA) with AO Dynamic Condylar Screws (DCS) for the Treatment for Unstable Peritrochanteric Femoral Fractures

Overview

Journal Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2013 Feb 28

PMID 23443746

Citations 19

Authors

Emrah Kemal Sahin

Ahmet Imerci

Hakan Kinik

Levent Karapinar

Umut Canbek

Ahmet Savran

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the results of intramedullary fixation with those of plate-screw fixation for peritrochanteric femoral fracture patients older than 60 years old.

Methods: This article reports on a retrospective review of patients who had peritrochanteric femoral fractures and were treated with a 95° fixed-angle screw plate (DCS) or an intramedullary nailing system (PFNA). Patients with 79 fractures were enrolled in the study; 47 of them were treated with the PFNA system and 37 with the DCS. Followed for at least 1 year, the treatment groups were compared by taking into consideration all demographic and trauma variables.

Results: No significant differences were discovered between the two groups with regard to side of injury, mechanism of trauma, associated comorbidities, AO fracture classification, average follow-up duration, mortality, and fracture reduction quality at the 1-year follow-up. The average surgical time was significantly lower in the PFNA group (57 min.) compared to the DCS group (87 min.). Longer operative time was needed in the DCS group, and thus, greater blood loss occurred compared to the PFNA group. The functional results of the PFNA group were found to be significantly better than those of the DCS group.

Conclusions: Owing to some advantages, such as minimal exposure, reduced operative blood loss, and the achievement of biological fixation, PFNA is a better choice for the treatment for unstable peritrochanteric fractures.

Citing Articles

Construction and validation of a nomogram prediction model for factors affecting hip functional recovery after PFNA internal fixation of intertrochanteric femur fractures in the elderly.

Jiang W Medicine (Baltimore). 2025; 103(52):e41043.

PMID: 39969372 PMC: 11688005. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000041043.

Comparative efficacy of proximal femoral nail dynamic condylar screw in treating unstable intertrochanteric fractures.

Mohamed A, Salih M, Abdulgadir M, Abbas A, Lutfi Turjuman D World J Orthop. 2024; 15(8):796-806.

PMID: 39165874 PMC: 11331321. DOI: 10.5312/wjo.v15.i8.796.

The Functional Outcome of Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation-2 (PFNA-2) in Peritrochanteric Fractures of the Femur.

Singh G, Kumar A, Bhat M, Thakur A Cureus. 2024; 16(7):e64839.

PMID: 39156446 PMC: 11330281. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.64839.

Application of Hip Pericapsular Nerve Block Combined With Spinal Anesthesia in the Treatment of Elderly Patients With Femoral Intertrochanteric Fracture.

Li S, Liu X, Ren X, Bai Y, Li L, Zhang Q J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2024; 24(2):178-184.

PMID: 38826000 PMC: 11145325.

The Comparison of Dynamic Condylar Screw Plate to Proximal Femoral Nail in Reverse Oblique and Transverse Intertrochanteric Fractures: A Retrospective Study on 61 Patients.

Sensoz E, Ergun S, Kayaalp M, Eceviz E Cureus. 2023; 15(3):e36397.

PMID: 37090379 PMC: 10115748. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.36397.

References

Simmermacher R, Ljungqvist J, Bail H, Hockertz T, Vochteloo A, Ochs U . The new proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) in daily practice: results of a multicentre clinical study. Injury. 2008; 39(8):932-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2008.02.005. View

Liu Y, Tao R, Liu F, Wang Y, Zhou Z, Cao Y . Mid-term outcomes after intramedullary fixation of peritrochanteric femoral fractures using the new proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA). Injury. 2010; 41(8):810-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.03.020. View

Konstantinidis L, Papaioannou C, Mehlhorn A, Hirschmuller A, Sudkamp N, Helwig P . Salvage procedures for trochanteric femoral fractures after internal fixation failure: biomechanical comparison of a plate fixator and the dynamic condylar screw. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2011; 225(7):710-7. DOI: 10.1177/0954411911402133. View

Radford P, Howell C . The AO dynamic condylar screw for fractures of the femur. Injury. 1992; 23(2):89-93. DOI: 10.1016/0020-1383(92)90039-u. View

Xu Y, Geng D, Mao H, Zhu X, Yang H . A comparison of the proximal femoral nail antirotation device and dynamic hip screw in the treatment of unstable pertrochanteric fracture. J Int Med Res. 2010; 38(4):1266-75. DOI: 10.1177/147323001003800408. View

Schatzker J, Mahomed N, Schiffman K, Kellam J . Dynamic condylar screw: a new device. A preliminary report. J Orthop Trauma. 1989; 3(2):124-32. DOI: 10.1097/00005131-198906000-00007. View

Kristek D, Lovric I, Kristek J, Biljan M, Kristek G, Sakic K . The proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) in the treatment of proximal femoral fractures. Coll Antropol. 2010; 34(3):937-40. View

Salvati E, WILSON Jr P . Long-term results of femoral-head replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1973; 55(3):516-24. View

Saarenpaa I, Heikkinen T, Ristiniemi J, Hyvonen P, Leppilahti J, Jalovaara P . Functional comparison of the dynamic hip screw and the Gamma locking nail in trochanteric hip fractures: a matched-pair study of 268 patients. Int Orthop. 2007; 33(1):255-60. PMC: 2899252. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-007-0458-y. View

10.

Vaidya S, Dholakia D, Chatterjee A . The use of a dynamic condylar screw and biological reduction techniques for subtrochanteric femur fracture. Injury. 2003; 34(2):123-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0020-1383(02)00319-4. View

11.

Zou J, Xu Y, Yang H . A comparison of proximal femoral nail antirotation and dynamic hip screw devices in trochanteric fractures. J Int Med Res. 2009; 37(4):1057-64. DOI: 10.1177/147323000903700410. View

12.

Zhang C, Zeng B, Dong Y, Terrell D, Malawer M . Dynamic condylar screw or hip joint (spanning) external fixator for treatment of pathological fractures of femoral neck and trochanter secondary to benign lesions. Chin Med J (Engl). 2008; 121(2):178-80. View

13.

Sahin S, Erturer E, Ozturk I, Toker S, Seckin F, Akman S . Radiographic and functional results of osteosynthesis using the proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) in the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric femoral fractures. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2010; 44(2):127-34. DOI: 10.3944/AOTT.2010.2237. View

14.

Garg B, Marimuthu K, Kumar V, Malhotra R, Kotwal P . Outcome of short proximal femoral nail antirotation and dynamic hip screw for fixation of unstable trochanteric fractures. A randomised prospective comparative trial. Hip Int. 2011; 21(5):531-6. DOI: 10.5301/HIP.2011.8657. View

15.

Akinci O, Akalin Y, Reisoglu A, Kayali C . Comparison of long-term results of dynamic hip screw and AO 130 degrees blade plate in adult trochanteric region fractures. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2011; 44(6):443-51. DOI: 10.3944/AOTT.2010.2356. View

16.

Yoo M, Cho Y, Kim K, Khairuddin M, Chun Y . Treatment of unstable peritrochanteric femoral fractures using a 95 degrees angled blade plate. J Orthop Trauma. 2005; 19(10):687-92. DOI: 10.1097/01.bot.0000184141.52330.5e. View

17.

Wynn Jones H, Johnston P, Parker M . Are short femoral nails superior to the sliding hip screw? A meta-analysis of 24 studies involving 3,279 fractures. Int Orthop. 2006; 30(2):69-78. PMC: 2532072. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-005-0028-0. View

18.

Utrilla A, Reig J, Munoz F, Tufanisco C . Trochanteric gamma nail and compression hip screw for trochanteric fractures: a randomized, prospective, comparative study in 210 elderly patients with a new design of the gamma nail. J Orthop Trauma. 2005; 19(4):229-33. DOI: 10.1097/01.bot.0000151819.95075.ad. View

19.

Pu J, Liu L, Wang G, Fang Y, Yang T . Results of the proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) in elderly Chinese patients. Int Orthop. 2009; 33(5):1441-4. PMC: 2899136. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-009-0776-3. View

20.

Takigami I, Matsumoto K, Ohara A, Yamanaka K, Naganawa T, Ohashi M . Treatment of trochanteric fractures with the PFNA (proximal femoral nail antirotation) nail system - report of early results. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2008; 66(4):276-9. View