Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (5)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = basicervical fracture

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
10 pages, 1622 KB  
Article
High Fixation Failure Rate of Cephalomedullary Nail Fixation in Patients with Low-Energy Basicervical Femoral Fractures: Do We Need Extramedullary Reduction?
by Chang-Jin Yon, Ki-Cheor Bae, Young-Hun Kim and Kyung-Jae Lee
Medicina 2025, 61(1), 112; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina61010112 - 14 Jan 2025
Viewed by 1487
Abstract
Background and Objectives: A basicervical femoral fracture is a relatively uncommon type of proximal femoral fracture. However, as the proportion of proximal femoral fractures rises in conjunction with the aging of society, the absolute number of patients with basicervical femoral fractures is also [...] Read more.
Background and Objectives: A basicervical femoral fracture is a relatively uncommon type of proximal femoral fracture. However, as the proportion of proximal femoral fractures rises in conjunction with the aging of society, the absolute number of patients with basicervical femoral fractures is also increasing. Nevertheless, the optimal surgical methods for the treatment of basicervical femoral fractures remain a topic of debate. The aim of this study is to evaluate the failure rates of cephalomedullary nail fixation in basicervical femoral fractures based on reduction types. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 22 patients (22 hips) with AO/OTA 31-A1.2 hip fractures who had undergone treatment with a cephalomedullary nail (PFNA-II or Gamma-3) between March 2007 and February 2018. They were classified into three groups based on the reduction types: extramedullary (E), anatomical (A), or intramedullary (I). The intramedullary group included cases where the basicervical component was impacted into the medullary canal, while the extramedullary group comprised cases where the component was displaced beyond the medullary canal. The anatomical group consisted of specimens that exhibited complete anatomical reduction. This was determined by both the anteroposterior (AP) view and the lateral view using simple radiographs. Results: There were 13 patients (59.1%) in Group E and 9 patients (40.9%) in Group A. No patients were classified in Group I. Fixation failure occurred in four patients (18.1%, 4/22). In Group E, no patients exhibited fixation failure (0%, 0/13). In contrast, four patients in Group A demonstrated fixation failure (44.4%, 4/9). Group A exhibited a significantly higher incidence of fixation failure (0% vs. 44.4%, p =0.037) compared to Group E. Conclusion: In the treatment of low-energy basicervical femoral fractures with cephalomedullary nails, extramedullary reduction demonstrated a lower rate of fixation failure compared to anatomical reduction in this study. While definitive conclusions regarding its superiority cannot be drawn due to the limited sample size, extramedullary reduction may serve as a promising alternative to reducing the high fixation failure rate associated with this challenging fracture type. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Orthopedics)
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 877 KB  
Article
Comparison of the Surgical Outcome between the Multiple Screw Fixation and Fixed Angle Devices for the Basicervical Femoral Neck Fractures
by Jin-Woo Kim, Jung-Wee Park, Hyo-Jung Kim, Tae-Young Kim, Jun-Il Yoo, Young-Kyun Lee and Byung-Woong Jang
Medicina 2024, 60(5), 680; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60050680 - 23 Apr 2024
Viewed by 2832
Abstract
Introduction: Basicervical femoral neck fracture (FNF) is an uncommon type of femoral neck fracture and is associated with an increased risk of fixation failure due to its inherent instability. The purpose of this study was to compare the surgical parameters and reoperation [...] Read more.
Introduction: Basicervical femoral neck fracture (FNF) is an uncommon type of femoral neck fracture and is associated with an increased risk of fixation failure due to its inherent instability. The purpose of this study was to compare the surgical parameters and reoperation rate between the use of a multiple cannulated screw (MCS) and fixed angle device (FAD) in treating basicervical FNFs. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 885 patients who underwent internal fixation between May 2004 and August 2019 to determine basicervical FNF with at least 12 months of follow-up. Among the identified 77 patients with basicervical FNF, 17 patients who underwent multiple cannulated screw (MCS) fixation and 36 patients who underwent fixed angle device (FAD) fixation were included. We compared the rates of fracture-site collapse and reoperations according to the fixation device. Results: Among the 53 patients with basicervical FNF, 13 patients (24.5%) sustained surgical complications (8 collapses of fracture site and 5 reoperations). The reoperation rate in the MCS group was significantly higher than that in the FAD group (23.5% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.016), without any significant difference in the collapse of the fracture site (11.8% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.642). Conclusions: Although basicervical FNF was rare among hip fractures, fracture site collapse was prevalent and prone to fixation failure. Surgeons should keep this in mind, and consider FAD for basicervical FNF. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Clinical Care and Updates on Hip Fractures)
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 1010 KB  
Article
Characteristics and Treatment Strategies for Basicervical and Transcervical Shear Fractures of the Femoral Neck
by Hiroaki Kijima, Shin Yamada, Tetsuya Kawano, Motoharu Komatsu, Yosuke Iwamoto, Natsuo Konishi, Hitoshi Kubota, Hiroshi Tazawa, Takayuki Tani, Norio Suzuki, Keiji Kamo, Ken Sasaki, Masashi Fujii, Itsuki Nagahata, Takanori Miura, Shun Igarashi and Naohisa Miyakoshi
J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12(22), 7024; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12227024 - 10 Nov 2023
Viewed by 5085
Abstract
This study aimed to define basicervical and transcervical shear fractures using area classification and to determine the optimal osteosynthesis implants for them. The clinical outcomes of 1042 proximal femur fractures were investigated. A model of the proximal femur of a healthy adult was [...] Read more.
This study aimed to define basicervical and transcervical shear fractures using area classification and to determine the optimal osteosynthesis implants for them. The clinical outcomes of 1042 proximal femur fractures were investigated. A model of the proximal femur of a healthy adult was created from computed tomography images, and basicervical and transcervical shear fractures were established in the model. Osteosynthesis models were created using a short femoral nail with a single lag screw or two lag screws and a long femoral nail with a single lag screw or two lag screws. The minimum principal strains of the fracture surfaces were compared when the maximum loads during walking were applied to these models using finite element analysis software. Basicervical fractures accounted for 0.96% of all proximal femur fractures, 67% of which were treated with osteosynthesis; the failure rate was 0%. Transcervical shear fractures accounted for 9.6% of all proximal femur fractures, 24% of which were treated with osteosynthesis; the failure rate was 13%. Finite element analysis showed that transcervical shear fracture has high instability. To perform osteosynthesis, multiple screw insertions into the femoral head and careful postoperative management are required; joint replacement should be considered to achieve early mobility. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Orthopedics)
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 2082 KB  
Article
Treatment of Trochanteric Hip Fractures with Cephalomedullary Nails: Single Head Screw vs. Dual Integrated Compression Screw Systems
by Marye M. Méndez-Ojeda, Alejandro Herrera-Rodríguez, Nuria Álvarez-Benito, Himar González-Pacheco, Miguel A. García-Bello, Javier Álvarez-de la Cruz and José L. Pais-Brito
J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12(10), 3411; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12103411 - 11 May 2023
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 4414
Abstract
Extracapsular hip fractures are very common in the elderly. They are mainly treated surgically with an intramedullary nail. Nowadays, both endomedullary hip nails with single cephalic screw systems and interlocking double screw systems are available on the market. The latter are supposed to [...] Read more.
Extracapsular hip fractures are very common in the elderly. They are mainly treated surgically with an intramedullary nail. Nowadays, both endomedullary hip nails with single cephalic screw systems and interlocking double screw systems are available on the market. The latter are supposed to increase rotational stability and therefore decrease the risk of collapse and cut-out. A retrospective cohort study was carried out, in which 387 patients with extracapsular hip fracture undergoing internal fixation with an intramedullary nail were included to study the occurrence of complications and reoperations. Of the 387 patients, 69% received a single head screw nail and 31% received a dual integrated compression screw nail. The median follow-up was 1.1 years, and in that time, a total of 17 reoperations were performed (4.2%; 2.1% for single head screw nails vs. 8.7% for double head screws). According to the multivariate logistic regression model adjusted for age, sex and basicervical fracture, the adjusted hazard risk of reoperation required was 3.6 times greater when using double interlocking screw systems (p = 0.017). A propensity scores analysis confirmed this finding. In conclusion, despite the potential benefits of using two interlocking head screw systems and the increased risk of reoperation in our single center, we encourage to other researchers to explore this question in a wider multicenter study. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advance in Orthopedic Trauma Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

5 pages, 5459 KB  
Case Report
Teriparatide as an Effective Nonsurgical Treatment for a Patient with Basicervical Peritrochanteric Fracture Nonunion—A Case Report
by Cheng-Han Ho, Shi-Chien Tzeng, Chui-Jia Farn and Chia-Che Lee
Medicina 2022, 58(8), 983; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58080983 - 23 Jul 2022
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 3870
Abstract
The nonunion rate of surgically treated basicervical peritrochanteric fractures has been reported to be as high as 9%. Due to the high 1-year mortality rate following revision surgery, finding an effective nonsurgical treatment option is of interest. Over the last decade, numerous reports [...] Read more.
The nonunion rate of surgically treated basicervical peritrochanteric fractures has been reported to be as high as 9%. Due to the high 1-year mortality rate following revision surgery, finding an effective nonsurgical treatment option is of interest. Over the last decade, numerous reports have been published that have suggested teriparatide as an effective treatment for certain types of fracture nonunion. However, the literature focused on teriparatide treatment for proximal femoral fracture nonunion is scanty. A 70-year-old man suffering from a left hip basicervical peritrochanteric fracture received cephalomedullary nail fixation. Nine months after the surgery, the patient still complained of left hip pain referring to the medial thigh with an antalgic limping gait. No sign of healing was noted for more than a consecutive 3 months of follow-up. Fracture nonunion was diagnosed and further confirmed by the computed tomography (CT). The patient preferred nonsurgical treatment after thorough discussion. He then received 4 months of subcutaneous teriparatide injections, 20 mcg daily. After less than 4 months of teriparatide treatment, a follow-up CT confirmed fracture union and the patient’s pain subsided. The patient also tolerated independent ambulation afterward. Teriparatide has been reported to be an effective treatment for certain types of fracture nonunion. Our case goes a step further to expand its possible application for basicervical peritrochanteric fracture nonunion. However, further larger scale studies are needed to confirm its efficacy. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop