股骨近端髓内钉治疗老年人股骨转子间骨折的疗效分析

股骨转子间骨折是老年人常见的骨折之一.随着人口的老龄化,转子间骨折发生率呈增加趋势.早期手术治疗已被人们广泛接受,可使患者早期功能锻炼,减少因长期卧床引起的并发症.我院2004 年1 月至2007年5月应用股骨近端髓内钉(PFN)治疗70岁以上股骨转子周围骨折患者93例,疗效满意.报道如下.     

股骨近端髓内钉治疗股骨转子间骨折

目的探讨股骨近端髓内钉治疗股骨转子间骨折的疗效。方法回顾分析2001年2月～2004年2月应用股骨近端髓内钉治疗股骨转子间骨折30例。结果本组病人28例得到随访,随访时间平均8个月,骨折全部愈合,无髋内翻并发症。结论股骨近端髓内针具有抗旋转稳定性能好,手术操作简单,创伤小,是治疗转子间骨折较理想的一种方法。     

伽玛钉治疗股骨转子间骨折的体会

[目的]分析Gamma3髓内钉内固定治疗股骨转子间骨折的临床疗效.[方法]采用回顾性方法,分析本院2009年5月～2010年8月采用Gamma3钉治疗26例不稳定性股骨转子间骨折的疗效.对手术过程、术中出血、术后功能恢复及并发症发生率进行分析.[结果]手术时间104.31 min±45.34 min,术中平均出血量122.31 ml±146.21 ml.23例患者均获骨折愈合,3例尚在随访中,无伤口感染、无髋内翻及无内固定切出等.[结论]采用Gamma3髓内钉治疗股骨转子间骨折术中创伤少,并发症率较低,是治疗不稳定性股骨转子间骨折较好方法.     

股骨近端防旋髓内钉和Gamma钉治疗老年不稳定型股骨转子间骨折疗效比较

目的比较股骨近端髓内钉和Gamma钉治疗老年不稳定股骨转子间骨折的疗效。方法将133例老年不稳定股骨转子间骨折患者按内固定方法分为股骨近端髓内钉(PFNA)组55例和Gamma钉组78例。比较两组的手术技巧、术后并发症、骨折愈合情况和髋关节功能。结果两组患者均获随访,时间6~18个月。两组在手术时间、术中出血量、骨折愈合情况及髋关节功能(末次随访Harris评分)比较差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。Gamma钉组出现2例髋螺钉切割,1例远端锁钉断裂,1例股骨干骨折;PFNA组无相关并发症发生。结论 PFNA和Gamma钉均是治疗老年不稳定型股骨转子间骨折的理想方法。与Gamma钉相比,PFNA显著降低了术后并发症,更适用于治疗老年骨质疏松性不稳定型股骨转子间骨折。     

Richard钉治疗高龄股骨转子间骨折

目的：介绍Richard钉治疗高龄股骨转阳骨折手术体会。方法,用国产Richard钉治疗不同类型高龄股骨转子间骨折50例。结果 随访45例,平均时间2年11个月,优良率95．6％,术后并发症发生率40％。结论 Richard钉是治疗高龄股骨转子间骨折的较好方法,高龄股骨转子间骨折应早期手术治疗,术后重视深静脉血栓的预防。     

Richard钉治疗股骨转子间骨折

目的评价Richard钉治疗股骨转子间骨折的治疗效果.方法分析75例经 Richard钉固定治疗的股骨转子间骨折患者术前、术后X线片、肢体功能和恢复全身情况.结果患者术后24 h坐起,8～10周扶拐下床活动.除2例住院围手术期间死亡外,其余患者骨折均愈合. 结论股骨转子间骨折,应严格掌握手术适应证,加强围手术期管理.采用Richard钉治疗,固定坚强,有利于骨折愈合,能早期关节活动.     

Richard钉内固定治疗股骨转子间骨折

股骨转子间骨折多系高龄患者。为使病人骨折后早离床活动，减少并发症的发生，愈来愈多的学者主张早期手术内固定。１９６７年美国Ｃａｌｅｒ最早应用Ｒｉｃｈａｒｄ钉，８０年代有应用此钉治疗股骨颈骨折的报道，后国内有用Ｒｉｃｈａｒｄ钉治疗股骨转子间骨折的报道，均...     

螺旋刀片髓内钉固定治疗老年股骨转子间骨折

目的比较专为骨质疏松设计的股骨近端螺旋刀片髓内钉（proximal femoral nail antirotion,PFNA）与目前临床常用的其他内固定系统在治疗老年股骨转子间骨折中的临床效果。方法2007年6月始采用PFNA治疗28例老年股骨转子间骨折患者,与同期我科采用不同内固定系统（动力髋螺钉、Gamma钉和股骨近端钉）治疗的相同疾病患者相比．分别从手术时间、手术并发症、骨折愈合时间及关节功能恢复情况进行分析。结果髋关节功能优良率73．3％。无感染、股骨颈螺钉切出、骨折断端塌陷吸收、主钉末端股骨干骨折等严重手术并发症;PFNA组手术时间、出血量优于其他内固定组。结论PFNA内固定治疗老年骨质疏松患者转子间骨折操作简单、固定牢固、初期疗效可靠、手术并发症发生率低,是一种理想的内固定方法。     

可膨胀股骨近端髓内钉内固定治疗股骨转子间骨折32例体会

股骨转子间骨折多发于老年人,为降低并发症和死亡率,手术治疗是首选治疗方法[1].2006年1月至2009年6月,我们采用闭合复位,可膨胀股骨近端髓内钉(PF)内固定治疗股骨转子间骨折患者32例,取得良好疗效,现总结如下.     

股骨近端防旋髓内钉与Gamma钉治疗老年人转子间骨折的疗效比较分析

[目的]比较分析股骨近端防旋髓内钉与Gamma钉对老年人骨质疏松性股骨转子间骨折的临床疗效。[方法]随访病例共123例,其中2002年5月～2005年9月入院的股骨转子间骨折病例中有55例患者使用Gamma钉固定,2005年11月～2008年6月的转子间骨折患者有68例患者使用PFNA治疗,从术中、术后并发症、骨折愈合以及术后髋关节功能对两种治疗方法的临床疗效进行比较分析。[结果]股骨近端防旋髓内钉与Gamma钉的术中失血量、输血量、感染、深静脉血栓形成、住院日方面统计学无显著性差异,末次随访骨折愈合率两组无显著性差异,Gamma钉组有1例患者发生股骨头坏死,髋部疼痛发生率较PFNA组稍高,但髋关节功能Harris评分两组无明显差异。[结论]PFNA与SGN治疗老年人股骨转子间骨折对骨折周围软组织医源性创伤小,骨折可稳定固定,并发症较少,均为治疗老年人股骨转子间骨折的可靠方法。     

Anterograde femoral nail for the treatment of femoral metastases

Introduction  Intramedullary nailing is a common technique for the treatment of impending and pathological fractures of the femur due to bone metastases when diaphysis or metadiaphysis is involved. Reconstructive nailing is currently used in the treatment of subtrochanteric involvements for reducing the risk of fracture above the nail. The aim of this study is to assess the results of a consecutive series of 13 impending or complete femoral fractures due to metastastic localization treated with anterograde femoral nail (Synthes). Patients and methods  Thirteen cases of femoral metastases in patients afflicted by multiple bone localization were considered in this series. Indications were femoral fracture or prophilactic stabilization in the case of osteolysis with a fracture risk defined according to Mirels’ criteria. Titanium anterograde femoral nail was used in all the cases. The proximal part was 17 mm in diameter in all the cases; nail diameter ranged from 10 to 12 mm, and nail was distally locked with two screws inserted in a static mode. Biopsy for confirming the diagnosis was routinely performed. Nail was locked with two distal screws inserted in a static mode and two proximal full screws with recon mode. Discussion  The improvement of the quality of life, with no mechanical problems (screw breakage or implant failure), was observed in this series. Two patients died within 6 months after operation; the others were alive at the time of follow-up (maximum follow-up of 16 months). Results  Results confirmed that intramedullary reconstructive-locked nailing is the treatment of choice in plurimetastatic patients afflicted by impending/or complete femoral fracture. These results suggest that reconstructive nailing using an AFN may be considered a useful strategy for the treatment of diaphyseal and metaphyseal femoral metastatic lesions.     

Minimally invasive femoral nail extraction

Introduction Case report about a minimally invasive technique for removal of a femoral antegrade nail (FAN). Femoral nails are introduced by minimally invasive techniques, but are often removed with more invasive surgery.Materials and methods Four cases of young patients are described in whom the femoral nail was removed after consolidation by a minimally invasive extraction technique at the trochanteric site. By using a threaded wire for locating the proximal entrance of the femoral nail followed by reaming over the wire, the entrance of the nail in the trochanteric region is freed. Then the extraction bolt can be placed over the wire and the nail can be extracted through the same incision as it was inserted in, without enlarging the incision.Discussion This case report discusses a technique for minimally invasive femoral nail extraction, not the necessity of removing nails. Leaving out the endcap at the initial operation is the only preoperative condition, since the endcap blocks the entrance of the nail. This operation is done with fluoroscopic guidance. The difficult part is the reaming. The reamer must not be damaged when approaching the nail entrance. This minimally invasive femoral nail extraction technique is applicable for various types of femoral nails.Conclusion Minimally invasive extraction of femoral nails is possible and needs more attention. The level of evidence is a level IV case series.Concerning funding, there was no financial support for this report.     

Proximal femoral nail for treatment of trochanteric femoral fractures

PURPOSE: To report outcomes of 87 consecutive patients treated with a proximal femoral nail (PFN) for trochanteric femoral fractures. METHODS: 17 men and 70 women aged 58 to 95 (mean, 85) years with trochanteric femoral fractures underwent PFN fixation using an intramedullary nail, a lag screw, and a hip pin. Fractures were classified according to the AO system; the most common fracture type was A2 (n=45), followed by A1 (n=36) and A3 (n=6). The position of the lag screw within the femoral head was measured. The lateral slide of the lag screw after fracture consolidation was measured by comparing the immediate postoperative and final anteroposterior radiographs. RESULTS: 90% of lag screws were placed in an optimal position. The length of lateral slide of the lag screw in stable A1 fractures was significantly less than that in unstable A2 fractures; it was over 10 mm in 7 of 45 patients with A2 fractures. Cut-out of lag screw did not occur, suggesting that free sliding of the lag screw facilitates direct impaction between fragments. CONCLUSION: A PFN is useful for the treatment of trochanteric femoral fractures.     

Retrograde locking nail osteosynthesis of distal femoral fractures with the distal femoral nail (DFN)

Non-operative treatment with immobilization or isometric traction has been abandoned as treatment for fractures of the distal femur at the end of the 1960ies. The technique of open reduction and internal fixation with a condylar plate as suggested by the AO has been the golden standard since the 1970ies. However, anatomic reconstruction of the condylar region with interfragmentary screw fixation and axial realignment of the femur shaft with a plate are challenging procedures especially in the presence of severely compromised soft tissues and put periosteal blood supply at risk. Soft tissue complications, axial malalignment and delayed fracture healing times led to the consideration of alternative techniques, such as intramedullary nailing which has been practiced with success since the 1940ies by Gerhard Küntscher and colleagues for femoral shaft fractures with minimal complication rates and improved results after closed reduction. The era of retrograde femoral nailing began with the systematic approach through the intercondylar notch by Green. This paper reviews the biomechanical properties, indication, technique as well as potential hazards and pitfalls of fracture management with the AO "distal femoral nail" (DFN). With appropriate application this technique is suitable for all fractures of the distal third of the femoral shaft including highly instable bicondylar fractures without damage to the soft tissues and the knee joint.     

股骨近端防旋髓内钉治疗股骨转子间骨折

正2011年5月~2014年10月,我们采用股骨近端防旋髓内钉(PFNA)治疗43例股骨转子间骨折患者,疗效满意,报道如下。1材料与方法1.1病例资料本组43例,男16例,女27例,年龄56~83岁。均为闭合骨折。骨折按AO分型:A1型9例,A2型19例,A3型15例。受伤至手术时间2~6 d。1.2治疗方法椎管内麻醉。患者侧     

股骨近段钉治疗股骨转子间骨折

目的探讨股骨近段钉（PFN）治疗股骨转子间骨折的临床疗效。方法对56例股骨转子间骨折患者采用PFN进行固定，对各患者的手术时间、术中出血量、骨折愈合时间、髋关节功能、并发症进行记录分析，评价其临床疗效。结果手术时间平均66min，术中出血平均370ml。所有患者获随访，时间5～20个月。骨折平均愈合时间为12．6周；2例发生异位骨化并发症。参照Sanders髋功能评分标准：优42例，良10例，中4例，优良率达93.5％。结论PFN是治疗股骨转子间骨折的有效方法。     

股骨近端髓内钉治疗股骨近端骨折

目的探讨股骨近端髓内钉(PFN)治疗股骨近端骨折的疗效.方法采用PFN内固定治疗60例股骨近端骨折患者.结果术后随访55例,随访时间7～30个月(平均12个月).39例骨折接近解剖复位,疗效评定优28例,良9例,可2例;16例非解剖复位者疗效评定优5例,良9例,可2例. 结论仔细的外科技术和选择合适的PFN可减少并发症发生的几率.当可以进行不切开骨折部位的闭合复位时,PFN是一种好的侵害小的治疗不稳定股骨近端骨折的内固定物.