PCCP versus Standard Proximal Femoral Nail in the Treatment of Pertrochanteric Femoral Fractures

Czech version

Authors: J. Kraus; V. Volf; F. Burget; B. Jindrová ^*
Authors‘ workplace: I. chirurgická klinika 1. LF a VFN Praha, přednosta: prof. MUDr. Z. Krška, CSc. ; Klinika anesteziologie, resuscitace a intenzivní medicíny 1. LF UK a VFN, přednosta: doc. MUDr. M. Stříteský, CSc. Práce podpořena grantem 8830-4 IGA MZ ČR. ^*
Published in: Rozhl. Chir., 2009, roč. 88, č. 8, s. 469-474.
Category: Monothematic special - Original

Overview

The aim of our study
was to compare two groups of patients with pertrochanteric femoral fracture types 31 A1 A2 A3 according to the AO who were treated with two different types of implants. The first group of 54 consecutive patients with above mentioned types of femoral fractures were treated using Proximal reconstruction nail manufacturer Beznoska comp., which is a standard implant we have been using for two years. The second group of 33 patients were treated with a new implant PCCP (Percutaneous Compression Plate) manufacturer Orthofix. We evaluated the time of operation, total blood loss (hgb, htc, number of blood transfusions), peri- and postoperative complications and subjective feeling of pain using the VAS (Visual Analogous Scale). The patients were at the time of procedure and after one year follow-up. The operation time of the standard and new techniques were comparable. The miniinvasive technique of PCCP was accompanied with significantly lower blood loss and significantly lower intensity of pain after the procedure. There was no difference in number of complications. One-year follow-up assessment showed greater mortality in the patients treated by the standard Proximal reconstruction nail (Beznoska CR).

Key words:
pertrochanteric fracture – minimally invasive percutaneous fracture fixation – blood loss – percutaneous compression plate

Sources

1. Anderson, G. H., Raymakers, R., Gregg, P. J. The incidence of proximal femoral fractures in an English county. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br., 1993, 75(3): 441–444.

2. Gallagher, J. C., Melton, L. J., Riggs, B. L., et al. Epidemiology of fractures of the proximal femur in Rochester. Minnesota Clin. Orthop., 1980, 150: 163–171.

3. Jensen, J. S. Incidence of hip fracture. Acta Orthop. Scand., 1980, 51: 511–513.

4. Symposium Hip fractures in the elderly: the coming epidemic. AAOS Annual Meeting, 1993, San Francisco.

5. Wallace, W. A. The increasing incidence of fractures of the proximal femur: an orthopaedic epidemic. Lancet, 1983, 25: 1413–1414

6. Brandt, S. E., Lefever, S., Janzing, H. M., Broos, P. L., Pilot, P., Houben, B. J. Percutaneous compression plating (PCCP) versus the dynamic hip screw for pertrochanteric hip fractures: preliminary results. Injury, 2002, Jun, 33(5): 413–418 .

7. Gotfried, Y. Percutaneous compression plating of intertrochanteric hip fractures. J. Orthop. Trauma, 2000, 14(7): 490–495.

8. Janzing, H. M., Houben, B. J., Brandt, S. E., Chhoeurn, V., Lefever, S., Broos, P., Reynders, P., Vanderschot, P. The Gotfried PerCutaneous Compression Plate versus the Dynamic Hip Screw in the treatment of pertrochanteric hip fractures: minimal invasive treatment reduces operative time and post-operative pain. J. Trauma, 2002, 52(2): 293–298.

9. Kosygan, K. P., Mohan, R., Newman, R. J. The Gotfried percutaneous compression plate compared with conventional/classic hip screw for the fixation of intertrochanteric fractures of the hip. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br., 2002, 84(1): 19–22

10. Krasheninnikoff, M., Gramkow, J., Torholm, C., Gotfried, P. C. C.P: A new method for osteosynthesis of intertrochanteric fractures of the femur. Acta Orthop. Scand., 1998, 280(Suppl 1): 30–31.

11. Peyser, A., Weil, Y., Brocke, L., Manor, O., Mosheiff, R., Liebergall, M. Percutaneous compression plating versus compression hip screw fixation for the treatment of intertrochanteric hip fractures. Injury, 2005, 36(11): 1343–1349

12. Muller, M. E., Allgower, M., Willenegger, H. Manual of internal fixation. Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 1970. Orthopĺdic trauma association committee for coding and classification. Fracture and dislocation compendium. J. Orthop. Trauma, 1996, 10 (Suppl 1): 31–34.

13. Gotfried, Y., Cohen, B., Rotem, A. Biomechanical evaluation of the percutaneous compression plating system for hip fractures. J. Orthop. Trauma, 2002, 16, 9: 644–650.

14. Dodd, R. The risk of transfusion-transmitted infection. N. Engl. J. Med., 1992, 327: 419–421.

15. Linden, J. V., Kaplan, H. S. Transfusion errors: causes and effects. Transfus. Med. Rev., 1994, 8: 169–183.

16. Perkins, H. Transfusion-induced immunologic unresponsivness. Transfus. Med. Rev., 1988, 2: 196–203.

17. Džupa, V., Bartoníček, J., Skála-Rosenbaum, J., Příkazský, V. Mortality in patients with proximal femoral fractures during the first year after the injury. Acta Chir. Orthop. Traumatol. Cech., 2002, 69(1): 39–44 Czech

18. Chirodian, N., Arch, B., Parker, M. J. Sliding hip screw fixation of trochanteric hip fractures: outcome of 1024 procedures. Injury, 2005, 36(6): 793–800. Epub 2005 Apr. 20

19. Larsson, S., Friberg, S., Hansson, L. I. Trochanteric fractures. Mobility, complications, and mortality in 607 cases treated with the sliding-screw technique. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res., 1990 (260): 232–241.

20. Giancola, R., Antonini, G., Delle Rose, G. Percutaneous compression plating versus gamma nail for the treatment of pertrochanteric hip fractures. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr., 2008, April; 3(1): 9–14.