Objective To explore the clinical effects and advantages of femoral intertrochanteric fracture treated by wire bound cemented bipolar femoral head replacement and sliding hip screw internal fixation. Methods 80 cases of patients with femoral intertrochanteric fracture were included in our study. All the patients were divided into the following two groups according to the surgical method: 42 cases in an experiment group and 38 cases in a control group, which were treated wire bound cemented bipolar femoral head replacement and sliding hip screw internal fixation, respectively. Some parameters such as surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, bed time, VAS score, Harris functional score and complications were evaluated. Results The surgical time, intraoperative and postoperative blood loss of the experimental group were higher than those of the control group, there was statistical difference between the two groups (P<0.05). The bed time of the experimental group was shorter than that of the control group, there was significant difference between the two groups (P<0.05). The VAS score and Harris score of patients in the experimental group during the follow-up at 6 months and 12 months were better than those of the control group. There was statistical difference in the complication rate, the VAS score and Harris score between two groups(P＜0.05). The complication rate of the experimental group and the control group were 28.6% and 63.2% (χ2=9.13，P=0.003). Conclusions Compared with dynamic sliding hip screw internal fixation, wire bound cemented bipolar femoral head replacement has intraoperative trauma, but short bed time, thus can be carried out early functional exercises, which has better clinical effect and is worthy of clinical promotion.
Key words
Elderly /
Femoral intertrochanteric fracture; Bipolar femoral head replacement; DHS
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
[1] Altun G, Saka G, Demir T, et al. Precontoured buttress plate vs reconstruction plate for acetabulum posterior wall fractures: a biomechanical study[J]. World J Orthop, 2019, 10(5): 219-227.
[2] Correa-Valderrama A, Stangl-Herrera W, Echeverry-Vélez A, et al. Relationship between body mass index and complications during the first 45 days after primary total hip and knee replacement: a single-center study from south america[J]. Clin Orthop Surg, 2019, 11(2): 159-163.
[3] 王武, 翟生, 韩小平, 等. 股骨近端抗旋髓内钉与动力髋螺钉对老年不稳定股骨粗隆间骨折疗效的对比研究[J]. 中华医学杂志, 2018, 98(5): 357-361.
[4] 龙行春, 曹毅, 周振宇, 等. 人工股骨头置换与防旋型股骨近端髓内钉内固定治疗高龄不稳定型股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2017, 37(21): 5377-5379.
[5] El-Husseiny M, Masri B, Duncan C, et al. Long-term results of tripolar constrained total hip arthroplasty in revision hip arthroplasty: a minimum follow-up of ten years[J]. Bone Joint J, 2019, 101-B (6 Supple B): 123-126.
[6] Gurger M. Factors impacting 1-year mortality after hip fractures in elderly patients: a retrospective clinical study[J]. Niger J Clin Pract, 2019, 22(5): 648-651.
[7] Lee YK, Won HJ, Roa KRU, et al. Bipolar hemiarthroplasty using microarc oxidation-coated cementless stem in patients with unstable intertrochanteric fracture[J]. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong), 2019, 27(2): 2309499019847815.
[8] Min BW, Lee KJ, Oh JK, et al. The treatment strategies for failed fixation of intertrochanteric fractures[J]. Injury, 2019, 50(7): 1339-1346.
[9] 杨家赵,孙建皖,王叙进, 等.骨水泥型双动头置换治疗高龄股骨转子间骨折的临床疗效[J].临床骨科杂志,2017,20(6):707-709. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-0287.2017.06.024.
[10] 袁伟, 程少文, 彭磊. PFNA-Ⅱ、LCP及股骨头置换三种方法治疗A2型股骨粗隆间骨折的比较[J]. 中国矫形外科杂志, 2018, 26(12): 1090-1093.
[11] 蔡保塔, 徐成毅, 曹军, 等. 三种内固定方式治疗老年股骨转子间骨折的疗效比较[J]. 中华创伤骨科杂志, 2016, 18(7): 564-568.
[12] 赵恒伍, 张磊, 廉明, 等. 改良动力髋螺钉治疗老年股骨转子间骨折 (A2型) 的疗效[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2018, 38(3): 614-616.
