Background and purpose - The trochanteric stabilizing plate (TSP) may be used as an adjunct to a sliding hip screw (SHS) in the treatment of trochanteric fractures to increase construct stability. We performed a scoping review of the literature to clarify when and how the TSP may be useful.Methods - A systematic search was performed in 5 databases and followed by a backwards-and-forwards citation search of the identified papers. 24 studies were included.Results - 6 biomechanical studies and 18 clinical studies were included in the review. The studies presented mainly low-level evidence. All studies were on unstable trochanteric fractures or fracture models. Due to the heterogeneity of methods and reporting, we were not able to perform a meta-analysis. In the biomechanical trials, the TSP appeared to increase stability compared with SHS alone, up to a level comparable with intramedullary nails (IMNs). We identified 1,091 clinical cases in the literature where a TSP had been used. There were 82 (8%) reoperations. The rate of complications and reoperations for SHS plus TSP was similar to previous reports on SHS alone and IMN. It was not possible to conclude whether the TSP gave better clinical results, when compared with either SHS alone or with IMN.Interpretation - The heterogeneity of methods and reporting precluded any clear recommendations on when to use the TSP, or if it should be used at all.
The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that precise restoration of distal radius fractures is correlated to better patient-reported outcome.The correlation between radiographic results and functional outcome was explored in 156 patients with extra-articular distal radius fractures included in a multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing 2 surgical interventions, Volar Locking Plate or External Fixator. The primary functional outcome was the Patient Rated Wrist and Hand Evaluation score (PRWHE). Radiographically we assessed volar tilt, radial inclination, radial height, ulnar variance, and the presence of ulnar styloid fracture. The Pearson correlation analysis was used to estimate correlations between parameters.At 1-year follow-up the mean difference in radiographic findings compared with the uninjured side (min, max) was: reduced volar tilt 5.3° (-15°, 25°), reduced radial inclination 2.3° (-6°, 12°), radial height 1.3 mm (-4 mm, 7 mm), and ulnar variance -0.5 mm (-6 mm, 3 mm). Overall, we found no correlation between radiographic parameters and the PRWHE at 1-year follow-up within the whole group, regardless of which treatment was chosen. At the time of injury 53% (N = 80) had sustained an additional ulnar styloid fracture. After 1 year this fracture was still radiographically present in 31% (N = 43) of the patients. No correlation between PRWHE score and the presence of an ulnar styloid fracture at 1-year follow-up was found.We found no correlation between functional outcome (PRWHE) and radiographic findings after 1 year in patients operated on with a Volar Locking Plate or External Fixator. Patient-specific factors were more important than radiographic measurements in this study group.Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level 2Trial registration: Norway: National Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics 213/555ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01904084Randomization of first patient: 02.09.2013.
Background: Intramedullary nails are commonly used in the treatment of trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures. We aimed to compare intramedullary nails in widespread use in Norway on the basis of reoperation risk. Methods: We assessed data from 13,232 trochanteric or subtrochanteric fractures treated with an intramedullary nail and registered in the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register between 2007 and 2019. The primary outcome measure was the risk of reoperation for various types of short and long intramedullary nails. Secondly, we compared risk of reoperation for the selected nails with respect to fracture type (AO/OTA type A1, A2, A3, and subtrochanteric fractures). Cox regression analysis adjusted for sex, age, and American Society of Anesthesiologists class was used to estimate hazard rate ratios (HRRs) for reoperation. Results: The mean patient age was 82.9 years, and 72.8% of the nails were used in the treatment of female patients. We included 8,283 short and 4,949 long nails. A1 fractures accounted for 29.8%, A2 for 40.6%, A3 for 7.2%, and subtrochanteric fractures for 22.4%. When comparing short nails regardless of fracture type, the TRIGEN INTERTAN had an increased risk of reoperation at 1 year (HRR, 1.31 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.03 to 1.66]; p = 0.028) and 3 years (HRR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.07 to 1.61]; p = 0.011) postoperatively compared with the Gamma3. For individual fracture types, we found no significant differences in reoperation risk between the various types of short nails. When comparing long nails, the TRIGEN TAN/FAN had an increased risk of reoperation at 1 year (HRR, 3.05 [95% CI, 2.10 to 4.42]; p < 0.001) and 3 years (HRR, 2.54 [95% CI, 1.82 to 3.54]; p < 0.001) postoperatively compared with the long Gamma3. Conclusions: This study may indicate a slightly increased risk of reoperation for the short TRIGEN INTERTAN compared with other short nails in widespread use in Norway. In analyses of long nails, the TRIGEN TAN/FAN nail was associated with a higher risk of reoperation in the treatment of trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
This study aimed to compare mortality in trochanteric AO/OTA A1 and A2 fractures treated with an intramedullary nail (IMN) or sliding hip screw (SHS). The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality, with secondary endpoints at 0 to 1, 2 to 7, 8 to 30, 90, and 365 days.
Abstract Background The trochanteric stabilizing plate (TSP) is used as an adjunct to the sliding hip screw (SHS) in unstable trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures. We wanted to describe the choice of implant for trochanteric fractures with a focus on the TSP in Norway. Methods A total of 20,902 fractures from the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register treated surgically in 43 hospitals from 2011 to 2017 were included. Logistic regression analyses were performed to detect factors potentially influencing implant choice. Results The mean age was 83 years, and 15,137 (72%) were women. An SHS was used in 13,273 (63%) fractures, of them 4407 (33%) with a TSP. Fracture classification was the most important determinant of TSP. In cases where an SHS was used, the odds ratio (OR) for using a TSP was 14 for AO/OTA 31A2 fractures and 71 for AO/OTA 31A3 and subtrochanteric fractures, compared to AO/OTA 31A1 fractures. The probability of receiving a TSP was higher in urban, academic, and high-volume hospitals (OR 1.2 to 1.3) and lower in Central and Northern Norway (OR 0.3 to 0.7). The use of an intramedullary nail (IMN) ( n = 7629 (36%)) was also to a degree decided by fracture classification (OR 1.8 to 5.3). However, hospital factors, with OR 0.1 to 0.4 for IMN in academic, urban, and high-volume hospitals and OR 1.5 to 2.6 outside South-Eastern Norway (all p < 0.001), were also important. Conclusions Fracture classification was the main determinant for TSP use. Any additional benefit from a TSP on postoperative fracture stability or clinical outcome needs to be clarified.
Background: The treatment of trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures is still controversial. In Norway the most commonly used implant for these fractures is the Sliding Hip Screw (SHS), with or without a trochanteric support plate. The Intertan nail (Smith & Nephew) has been launched as a nail with improved biomechanical properties for the treatment of these fractures, but so far it has not been shown that the clinical results are superior to the traditional Sliding Hip Screw.
We wanted to investigate any differences in pain and function between the new Intertan nail and the Sliding Hip Screw in the early postoperative phase.
Materials and Methods: 665 patients older than 60 years with a trochanteric or subtrochanteric fracture were randomized to either a SHS (CHS/DHS) or an Intertan nail in 5 hospitals. For practical reasons only 315 patients (47%) were evaluated at day 5 postoperatively (163 Intertan and 152 SHS), and these patients were used for our analysis. Pain was measured using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and early functional mobility by the “Timed Up and Go”- test (TUG-test). T-tests and chi-square tests were used to examine differences between the groups.
Results: The average pain at rest was similar for the 2 groups (VAS 21). Pain at mobilization, however, differed, where patients operated with the Intertan nail had less pain than those operated with the SHS (VAS 47 vs. 53, p = 0.02). The difference between the implants was most pronounced for the simple two-part fractures (AO Type A1). More patients treated with the nail than with the SHS performed the TUG-test at day 5 (85/163 vs. 63/152, p = 0.06), but there was no statistically significant difference regarding the average speed the TUG-test was performed with (71 vs. 66sec, p = 0.36). The implant type did not influence the length of hospital stay.
Discussion/Conclusion: Regarding early postoperative pain and function, there seems to be similar or better results for trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures treated with the Intertan nail compared to the SHS. The difference in measured pain level was statistically significant, but may not be clinically significant (a difference of VAS 6). We could not detect any significant differences in terms of early functional mobility between the two implants.
In our opinion it still remains to show good long-term results and acceptable complication rates before the new Intertan nail is widely taken into use. Due to the additional costs for the Intertan nail also economic aspects should be considered when choosing the implant and operative method for these fractures.
Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to compare the risk of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) following surgical treatment of distal radius fractures (DRFs) with either a volar locking plate (VLP) or an external fixator (EF). Methods Data from two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were merged and analyzed. A logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify independent risk factors for the occurrence of CRPS. Results A total of 322 patients were included from the two RCTs; 159 patients were operated upon with VLP and 163 patients with EF. CRPS was diagnosed in 6 patients treated with VLP (4%) and in 16 patients receiving EF (11%), overall 22 cases of CRPS (7%). None of the other independent risk factors had a significant influence on the risk for CRPS (all p > 0.05). Conclusion Patients treated with an EF had a higher risk of developing CRPS compared to those treated with a VLP. We found no other independent variable predicting CRPS. Level of evidence III.
Background: The use of volar locking plate fixation (VLP) for unstable extra-articular distal radial fractures has increased in the last decades. External fixation (EF) is less frequently used. This change of surgical approach has only to some extent been evidence-based. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized controlled trial, we compared VLP and EF in patients between 18 and 70 years of age who had a displaced extra-articular distal radial fracture (OTA/AO type A3). The patients were examined at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 1 year postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was the Patient-Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation score (PRWHE). Secondary outcomes were the shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), pain score on a visual analog scale (VAS), and radiographic measurements. Range of motion, grip strength, finger stiffness, complications, and reoperations were also recorded. Results: One hundred and fifty-six patients were included. One hundred and forty-two (91%)—127 women (89%) and 15 men (11%)—completed 1 year of follow-up. Sixty-nine patients were treated with VLP and 73, with EF. The mean age was 56 years. At 6 weeks, the median PRWHE score was significantly higher in the EF group (44) compared with the VLP group (27) (p < 0.001). At 3 months and 1 year, the difference between groups was not significant. The median QuickDASH score was 27 in the VLP group and 43 in the EF group at 6 weeks (p < 0.001), and a significant difference persisted at 3 months (p = 0.023). The VLP group had superior results in terms pain during activity, wrist extension, and ulnar and radial deviation at 1 year, whereas the number of major complications was similar in the 2 groups. Conclusions: Patients treated with VLP had earlier recovery of function compared with patients treated with EF. One year postoperatively, we found no significant functional difference. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
