{"title":"A comparative study between conventional and minimally invasive dynamic hip screw fixation in management of intertrochanteric femoral fractures","authors":"A. Gohiya, Pulak Sharma, R. Verma, S. Gaur","doi":"10.4103/2319-2585.180691","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The intertrochanteric fractures of femur are commonly fixed using dynamic hip screw using a conventional open Dynamic Hip Screw (CDHS). This is associated with a long incision, blood loss, considerable soft tissue trauma and pain. All these problems can be avoided using minimally invasive Dynamic Hip Screw (MIDHS), which has a theoretical advantage of less blood loss, soft tissue trauma, and early rehabilitation. Thus, we conducted a prospective comparative study of the two techniques. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective comparative study conducted over a period of 2 years at Department of Orthopedics GMC Bhopal. Fifty patients in the age group of 50-80 years who presented with intertrochanteric femur fracture and fulfilled inclusion criteria were divided into two groups of 25 each for fixation by CDHS or MIDHS. Patients in both the groups were matched. The data analysis was performed using SPSS package. Results: The patients in minimally invasive group had shorter operative time (45 min vs. 75 min). The average postoperative blood loss in drain in conventional group was 150 ml whereas no drain was used in minimally invasive group. Postoperatively need for analgesic was significantly lower in minimally invasive group (P < 0.05). Duration of hospital stay was significantly less with minimally invasive technique. The duration of bony union was similar in both techniques. Conclusion: Our study concludes that the minimally invasive technique of fixation of Intertrochanteric femur fractures is superior in terms of less operating time and less duration of hospital stay.","PeriodicalId":31882,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedics and Allied Sciences","volume":"4 1","pages":"36 - 39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedics and Allied Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/2319-2585.180691","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Introduction: The intertrochanteric fractures of femur are commonly fixed using dynamic hip screw using a conventional open Dynamic Hip Screw (CDHS). This is associated with a long incision, blood loss, considerable soft tissue trauma and pain. All these problems can be avoided using minimally invasive Dynamic Hip Screw (MIDHS), which has a theoretical advantage of less blood loss, soft tissue trauma, and early rehabilitation. Thus, we conducted a prospective comparative study of the two techniques. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective comparative study conducted over a period of 2 years at Department of Orthopedics GMC Bhopal. Fifty patients in the age group of 50-80 years who presented with intertrochanteric femur fracture and fulfilled inclusion criteria were divided into two groups of 25 each for fixation by CDHS or MIDHS. Patients in both the groups were matched. The data analysis was performed using SPSS package. Results: The patients in minimally invasive group had shorter operative time (45 min vs. 75 min). The average postoperative blood loss in drain in conventional group was 150 ml whereas no drain was used in minimally invasive group. Postoperatively need for analgesic was significantly lower in minimally invasive group (P < 0.05). Duration of hospital stay was significantly less with minimally invasive technique. The duration of bony union was similar in both techniques. Conclusion: Our study concludes that the minimally invasive technique of fixation of Intertrochanteric femur fractures is superior in terms of less operating time and less duration of hospital stay.
简介:股骨粗隆间骨折通常采用常规开放式动态髋螺钉(CDHS)进行动态髋螺钉固定。这与长切口、失血、相当大的软组织损伤和疼痛有关。所有这些问题都可以避免使用微创动态髋关节螺钉(MIDHS),理论上具有出血量少、软组织损伤少、早期康复的优势。因此,我们对这两种技术进行了前瞻性比较研究。材料和方法:这是一项在博帕尔GMC骨科进行的为期2年的前瞻性比较研究。50例年龄在50-80岁之间且符合纳入标准的股骨粗隆间骨折患者分为两组,每组25例采用CDHS或MIDHS固定。两组患者都是匹配的。数据分析采用SPSS软件包。结果:微创组手术时间短(45 min vs. 75 min)。常规组术后平均引流出血量150ml,微创组术后不引流。微创组术后镇痛需求明显低于对照组(P < 0.05)。微创技术可显著缩短住院时间。两种方法的骨愈合时间相似。结论:微创固定股骨粗隆间骨折具有手术时间短、住院时间短等优点。