Comparison of retrograde intramedullary nailing and percutaneous plate osteosynthesis methods in distal femur fractures
Öz
Purpose: The aim of this study is to make prospective randomized comprehensive analysis of treatment results between the retrograde interlocking femoral nail and the percutan plate osteosynthesis in distal femoral fractures.
Material and Methods: Forty seven patients (34M, 13F) underwent surgical treatment in our clinic with distal femoral fractures were evaluated. While 23 patients underwent retrograde interlocking femoral nailing, 24 patients underwent percutan plate osteosynthesis. Patients fractures were classified according to the AO Classification. The patients had open fractures were classified according to Gustilo Anderson. The patients were evaluated about functional fracture healing, union time and complication rates.
Results: The mean union times were 25.3±5.7 weeks to 22.3±9 weeks. There were 8 excellent, 6 good, 7 moderate, 2 fair results in retrograde nail group and 12 excellent, 9 good, 3 moderate results in percutanous plate group. The mean joint range of motion was 102.6±16.5° in the retrograde nail group and 115.8±18.3° in the percutan plate group.
Conclusion: Although union times are similar in both groups , percutan plate osteosynthesis is significantly superior than retrograde interlocking femoral nails about functions. Percutan plate osteosynthesis is significantly superior than retrograde interlocking femoral nail about complications.
Anahtar Kelimeler
femoral fractures,fracture fixation,intamedullary method,osteosynthesis
Kaynakça
- 1. Dar GN, Tak SR, Kangoo KA, Halwai MA. Bridge plate osteosynthesis using dynamic condylar screw (DCS) or retrograde intramedullary supracondylar nail (RIMSN) in the treatment of distal femoral fractures: comparison of two methods in a prospective randomized study. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2009;15:148-53.
- 2. Seifert J, Stengel D, Matthes G, Hinz P, Ekkernkamp A., Ostermann, PA. Retrograde fixation of distal femoral fractures: results using a new nail system. J Orthop Trauma, 2003;17:488-95.
- 3. Gao K, Gao W, Huang J, Li H, Li F, Tao J et al. Retrograde nailing versus locked plating of extra-articular distal femoral fractures: comparison of 36 cases. Med Princ Pract. 2012;22:161-6.
- 4. Demirtaş A, Azboy I, Özkul E, Gem M, Alemdar C. Comparison of retrograde intramedullary nailing and bridge plating in the treatment of extra-articular fractures of the distal femur. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2014;48:521-26.
- 5. Carmack DB, Berton RM, Kingston C, Zmurko M, Watson JT, Richardson M. Identification of the optimal intercondylar starting point for retrograde femoral nailing: an anatomic study. J Trauma. 2003;55:692–5.
- 6. Claes LE, Heigele CA, Neidlinger-Wilke C, Kaspar D, Seidl W, Margevicius KJ et al. Effects of mechanical factors on the fracture healing process. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;355:132-47.
- 7. Delong WG, Bennett FS. The GSH supracondylar nail. In Intramedullary Nailing, 2nd Ed. (Ed BD Browner):189-97. Baltimore, Williams and Wilkins, 1996.
- 8. Egol KA, Kubiak EN, Fulkerson E, Kummer FJ, Koval KJ. Biomechanics of locked plates and screws. J Orthop Trauma. 2004;18:488-93.
- 9. Frank O, Sutter PM, Regazzoni P. First experiences with Less Invasive Stabilisation System (L.I.S.S.) in distal femoral fractures. Swiss Surg. 2000;6:28.
- 10. Goodship AE, Kenwright J. The influence of induced micromovement upon the healing of experimental tibial fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1985;67:650-5.
