ObjectiveTo measure the rotation angle of the head-neck fragment of intertrochanteric fracture after cephalomedullary nail fixation by three-dimensional CT imaging, and to explore its clinical significance.MethodsThe clinical data of 68 patients with unstable intertrochanteric fracture of AO/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO-OTA) type 31-A2 treated with cephalomedullary nail fixation and with complete intraoperative fluoroscopy and postoperative three-dimensional CT imaging data between July 2016 and October 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, there were 21 males and 47 females, aged 68-93 years, with an average age of 81.8 years. There were 31 cases of AO/OTA type 31-A2.2 and 37 cases of 31-A2.3. Fracture reduction quality was evaluated according to Baumgaertner et al. and Chang et al. criteria. The anteromedial cortical contact or not of each patient was observed by three-dimensional CT imaging on T3DView software after operation. The rotation of head-neck fragments were divided into three types: non-rotation, flexion rotation, and hyperextension rotation. The rotation angles of each type were measured and the relationship between the rotation type of the head-neck fragments and the contact of the anteromedial cortex was analyzed.ResultsThe reduction and fixation of the small trochanter were not performed in 68 patients. According to Baumgaertner et al. criteria, the quality of fracture reduction was excellent in 15 cases (22.1%), acceptable in 50 cases (73.5%), and poor in 3 cases (4.4%). According to Chang et al. criteria, 31 cases were excellent (45.6%), 33 cases were acceptable (48.5%), and 4 cases were poor (5.9%). Thirty-nine cases (57.4%) received anteromedial cortical support and 29 cases (42.6%) did not receive cortical support. Three-dimensional CT imaging showed non-rotation in 12 cases (17.6%), flexion rotation in 39 cases (57.4%), and hyperextension rotation in 17 cases (25.0%). There were 7 cases (58.3%), 30 cases (76.9%), and 2 cases (11.8%) of cortical support in non-rotation group, flexion rotation group, and hyperextension rotation group, respectively. The rotation angles were (1.05±0.61), (13.96±6.17), (8.21±3.88)°, respectively. There were significant differences between groups (P<0.05).ConclusionIn the unstable intertrochanteric fracture after cephalomedullary nail fixation, the rotation of head-neck fragment exists in most patients, and the types of flexion rotation and non-rotation can easily obtain cortical support reduction.
ObjectiveTo introduce the reduction concept of anteromedial cortical support in the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture, summarize the history, characteristics, biomechanics, and clinical applications, discuss the unsolved problems and prospect the future directions.MethodsRelevant domestic and foreign studies on cortical support reduction of intertrochanteric fracture in recent years were reviewed. Conclusions were drawn combined with clinical experience.ResultsThe positive cortical supportive reduction of intertrochanteric fracture, as a stable non-anatomical fracture reduction technique, has dual effects on mechanical buttress and biological bone healing. It does not increase the difficulty of doctors’ surgical procedure. For patients, it decreases the loss of femoral neck length, the loss of neck-shaft angle, the incidence rate of coxa vara, and maintains stable mechanical structure of the pelvis. It also shows a lower rate of instrument-related complications, and higher limb function scores. The mechanical stability of medial cortex apposition is more important than that of anterior cortex. For the best stability of the fracture, both sides should get positive support reduction pattern.ConclusionAnteromedial cortical support reduction can improve the postoperative stability of intertrochanteric fracture, enable better imaging and functional prognosis. As a kind of non-anatomic form of functional reduction, it can be used as a suboptimal choice secondary to anatomic reduction.
ObjectiveTo summarize the evolving concept and research progress on stability reconstruction in the surgical treatment of intertrochanteric fracture.MethodsRelated literature and author’s own experience concerning the surgical treatment of intertrochanteric fracture were reviewed and analyzed in terms of fracture pathoanatomy, stable and unstable pattern, adequate and in-adequate reduction, primary and secondary stability, postoperative stability evaluation, and early weight-bearing.ResultsIntertrochanteric fracture occur at the translational area of cervico-trochanteric junction, which has a nature tendency to varus instability. Fracture reduction quality is the paramount factor and is evaluated by two views, the anteroposterior and lateral Garden alignment and cortex apposition between the head-neck fragment and the femoral shaft. Rather than the posteromedial lesser trochanteric frag ment, the cortical support concept (positive, neutral, negative) emphasizes the reduction of anteromedial cortex to a nonanatomic positive apposition or an " anatomic” neutral apposition in intraoperative fluoroscopy. Postoperative radiographic stability score provides a quantitative assessment for early weight-bearing standing and walking. However, some fractures may lose cortical contact and buttress (negative) during the process of postoperative telescoping and secondary stability. Further studies are needed to elucidate the risk factors such as tilting, swing or rotation of the head-neck fragment, and propose new preventive methods.ConclusionStability reconstruction of intertrochanteric fracture requires adequate fracture reduction with Garden alignment and anteromedial cortical support apposition, and reliable sustainment by internal fixation implants. Early weight-bearing standing and walking is safe in patients with perfect postoperative stability score.
Objective To introduce a novel comprehensive classification for femoral intertrochanteric fractures, and to accommodate the clinical requirement for the world-wide outbreak of geriatric hip fractures and surgical operations. Methods On the basis of reviewing the history of classification of femoral intertrochanteric fractures and analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of AO/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) classification in different periods, combined with the current situation of extensive preoperative CT scan and three-dimensional reconstruction and widespread use of intramedullary nail fixation in China, the “Elderly Hip Fracture” Research Group of the Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery Committee of the Chinese Rehabilitation Medical Association proposed a novel comprehensive classification for femoral intertrochanteric fractures, focusing on the structure of fracture stability reconstruction during internal fixation. Results The novel comprehensive classification of femoral intertrochanteric fractures incorporates multiple indicators of fracture classification, including the orientation of the fracture line, the degree of fracture fragmentation, the lesser trochanteric bone fragment and its distal extension length (>2 cm), the posterior coronal bone fragment and its anterior extension width (involving the lateral cortex of the head and neck implant entry point), transverse fracture of the lateral and anterior wall and its relationship with the implant entry point in the head and neck, and whether the cortex of the anteromedial inferior corner can be directly reduced to contact, etc. The femoral intertrochanteric fractures are divided into 4 types (type A1 is simple two-part fractures, type A2 is characterized by lesser trochanter fragment and posterior coronal fractures, type A3 is reverse obliquity and transverse fractures, type A4 is medial comminution which lacks anteromedial cortex transmission of compression force), each of which is subdivided into 4 subtypes and further subdivide into finer subgroups. In a review of 550 trochanteric hip fracture cases by three-dimensional CT, type A1 accounted for 20.0%, type A2 for 62.5%, type A3 for 15.5%, and type A4 for 2.0%, respectively. For subtypes, A2.2 is with a “banana-like” posterior coronal fragment, A2.4 is with distal cortex extension >2 cm of the lesser trochanter and anterior cortical expansion of the posterior coronal fragment to the entry portal of head-neck implants, A3.4 is a primary pantrochanteric fracture, and A4.4 is a concomitant ipsilateral segmental fracture of the neck and trochanter region. ConclusionThe novel comprehensive classification of femoral intertrochanteric fractures can describe the morphological characteristics of fractures in more detail, include more rare and complex types, provide more personalized subtype selection, and adapt to the clinical needs of both fractures and surgeries.