Comparison of Greater Trochanter Versus Piriformis Entry Nail for Treatment of Femur Shaft Fracture

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of femoral shaft fracture treatment with intramedullary nailing performed using a greater trochanter and a piriformis entry nail. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 57 patients treated by antegrade nailing for a femoral shaft fracture between January 2008 and April 2013 were included in this study. We evaluated postoperative radiographs of 57 femoral shaft fractures stabilized with femoral intramedullary nailing at a single institutional center. The cases included 25 piriformis fossa entry nails and 32 greater trochanter entry nails. Outcome measures included the alignment, union rate and duration of union, complications, operation time, intra-operative bleeding, and a pain rating scale. RESULTS: The alignment, union rate, and duration of union did not differ significantly between the groups with piriformis fossa and trochanteric nailing. In addition, no significant differences regarding complications and operation time were observed between the two groups. Less intra-operative bleeding was observed in the trochanteric nailing group. This difference was statistically significant (p=0.044). CONCLUSION: Use of a femoral nail specially designed for the trochanteric insertion resulted in equally high union rates, duration of union, and low complication rates. Thus, greater trochanter entry nails were similar to conventional antegrade femoral nailing through the piriformis fossa.

Results of Intramedullary Nailing of Femoral Shaft Fracture: Trochanteric Entry Portal (Sirus Nail) versus Piriformis Entry Portal (M/DN Nail)

PURPOSE: To compare treatment results obtained using the trochanteric (Sirus nail) entry portal with those obtained using the Piriformis fossa (M/DN) entry portal during intramedullary (IM) nailing of femur shaft fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four hundreds and thirty-two patients treated for femur shaft fracture using IM nails from February, 2001 to May, 2010 were divided into two groups. group 1 was composed of 180 patients treated through the trochanteric (Sirus nail; n=180) entry portal, while group 2 contained 170 patients treated through the piriformis fossa (M/DN nail; n=170) entry portal. We compared the clinical and radiographic findings of both groups to evaluate the treatment results. RESULTS: Functional result, range of motion and union time (18, 20 weeks) were similar in both groups. The operation time of patients in the over-weighted group was 90 minutes in group 1 and 120 minutes in group 2 (p0.05). There were 18 iatrogenic fractures in group 1 and 4 in group 2 (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: There was not much difference in complications based on clinical and radiographic findings of both groups. For groups using the trochanteric entry portal, the operation time was shorter and blood loss was lower than in groups using the piriformis entry portal. Iatrogenic fracture occurred more often in the group using the trochanteric entry portal than in the group using the piriformis entry portal.

The Treatment of IM Nailing of Femoral Shaft Fracture: Piriformis Fossa versus Trochanteric Entry Portal

PURPOSE: To compare the results of IM nailing of femur shaft fractures using trochanteric and piriformis fossa entry portal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 37 patients were treated with IM nail using Trochanteric (Trochanter group: TG, n=17) and piriformis fossa entry portal (piriformis group: PG, n=20) and were followed from February 2004 to 2007. The outcomes were assessed based on the clinical and radiographic findings. RESULTS: The functional result, ROM and union time were similar in both groups. The alignment was similar in both groups but PG showed variable alignment in proximal 1/3. Incision was larger in PG (PG=8.7 cm, TG=5.8 cm, p0.05), there was statistically significant difference in overweight groups (PG=125 minutes, TG=90 minutes, p<0.05). Blood loss was 313 cc in PG, 268 cc in TG and less in TG in overweight patients (p<0.05). There was 5.7degrees of varus angulation in PG, 2 nonunion cases in both groups. CONCLUSION: The femoral nail specially designed for trochanteric insertion resulted in high union rates, low complication rates similar to conventional nail and the trochanteric nail can be the alternative choice especially in proximal femur fracture and overweight patients.