» Articles » PMID: 35251536

Are Intertrochanteric Fractures Evolving? Trends in the Elderly Population over a 10-Year Period

Overview
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2022 Mar 7
PMID 35251536
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Intramedullary devices for the fixation of intertrochanteric fractures are increasing in usage and popularity. This reflects either a shift in adoption of new technology or intertrochanteric fractures becoming more complex or unstable. This trend was observed in our institution, hence we set out to investigate if this was concordant with an associated change in the demographics of the patients or in the morphology of the intertrochanteric fracture pattern over a 10-year period.

Methods: This is a retrospective cross-sectional comparison undertaken for the first 100 consecutive elderly patients with intertrochanteric fractures admitted to our tertiary institution over 3 yearly intervals, in each of the years 2004, 2007, 2010, and 2013. Fractures were radiologically classified via the Evans and AO classifications. Patient demographics such as age, ethnicity, and comorbidities and surgical data including time, type of fixation, time to surgery, and length of stay were collected via case note reviews to identify possible trends.

Results: The overall mean age was 80.5 years, with no statistically significant trend among age, sex, ethnicity, and comorbidities over the 10-year period. The main finding was a rise in the proportion of unstable intertrochanteric fractures. The proportion of such fractures was 30% in 2004, 42% in 2007, 47% in 2010, and 62% in 2013 ( < 0.001). Patients admitted for intertrochanteric fractures also experienced a shorter hospital length of stay and an increasing trend towards early fracture fixation ( < 0.001), with a greater usage of intramedullary nails in the treatment of such fractures ( < 0.001).

Conclusions: Intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients have evolved into more complex fractures over the past ten years, despite there being no change in the age of the patients over the same duration. This increasing proportion of unstable intertrochanteric fractures has brought about a greater tendency to fix these fractures with intramedullary implants.

Citing Articles

Construction and validation of a predictive model for the risk of prolonged preoperative waiting time in patients with intertrochanteric fractures.

Gong R, Jin X, Xu L, Zhang Z, Yuan D, Xie W Front Med (Lausanne). 2025; 11:1503719.

PMID: 39895817 PMC: 11782220. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1503719.


Technical Note in Case Series a Novel Recent Technique for the Removal of Broken PFNA-II Blade in Intertrochanteric Fractures is a Technical Challenge.

Jain R, Chhawra S, Karnati A, Nagar A, Anand R J Orthop Case Rep. 2024; 14(11):246-250.

PMID: 39524275 PMC: 11546010. DOI: 10.13107/jocr.2024.v14.i11.4982.


A Comparative Study of the Early Postoperative Outcome of Three Intramedullary Fixation Modalities in the Treatment of Intertrochanteric Fractures of the Femur in the Elderly.

Fu H, Hu L, Zou F, Liao X, Zheng Y, Jin P J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2024; 24(3):310-317.

PMID: 39219329 PMC: 11367175.


Cement Filling Technique to Prevent Greater Trochanter Displacement in Hip Arthroplasty for Femoral Intertrochanteric Fracture: A Technical Note.

Choi B, Lee K, Son E, Min B Hip Pelvis. 2024; 36(3):223-230.

PMID: 39210576 PMC: 11380537. DOI: 10.5371/hp.2024.36.3.223.


A Novel Internal Fixation Design for the Treatment of AO/OTA-31A3.3 Intertrochanteric Fractures: Finite Element Analysis.

Chen X, Tang M, Zhang X, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Xiong C Orthop Surg. 2024; 16(7):1684-1694.

PMID: 38784971 PMC: 11216835. DOI: 10.1111/os.14041.


References
1.
Baumgaertner M, Curtin S, Lindskog D . Intramedullary versus extramedullary fixation for the treatment of intertrochanteric hip fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998; (348):87-94. View

2.
Napoli N, Schwartz A, Palermo L, Jin J, Wustrack R, Cauley J . Risk factors for subtrochanteric and diaphyseal fractures: the study of osteoporotic fractures. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013; 98(2):659-67. PMC: 3565107. DOI: 10.1210/jc.2012-1896. View

3.
Tan W, Low S, Shen L, Das De S . Osteoporotic hip fractures: 10-year review in a Singaporean hospital. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2015; 23(2):150-4. DOI: 10.1177/230949901502300206. View

4.
Reindl R, Harvey E, Berry G, Rahme E . Intramedullary Versus Extramedullary Fixation for Unstable Intertrochanteric Fractures: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015; 97(23):1905-12. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.N.01007. View

5.
Zain Elabdien B, OLERUD S, Karlstrom G . The influence of age on the morphology of trochanteric fracture. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg (1978). 1984; 103(3):156-61. DOI: 10.1007/BF00435546. View