Subtrochanteric femoral fractures: A case series of 194 patients treated with long and short intramedullary nails.

Background: IM nails are the gold standard of subtrochanteric fractures management. Indications to use a short rather than a long nail remain unclear. Operative complications of subtrochanteric fractures reach up to 25%. Objective: Retrospectively compare clinical and radiographic outcome of subtrochanteric fractures treated by long and short intramedullary nailing, analysing rates of complications. Methods: 390 patients were chosen from the archives. 194 patients were available: 70 treated with a short intramedullary nail (Group A), while 124 with long one (Group B). Radiographic evaluation at 6 and 12 months assess failure of the osteosynthesis. Clinical outcomes were the return to normal activities prior trauma and VAS scale. Group A mean age was 81.37 years, group B mean age was 78.9 years (29-99, SD: 15.38). Results: Radiografic Healing was found in 66 patients (94.28%) in group A, while in 116 patients (94.54%) in group B. Pseudarthrosis was found in 4 cases (5.71%) in group A, while in 8 cases (6.45%) in group B. Implant failure occurred in 5 cases: one required revision of fixation, while 4 require hip replacement. 59 patients of group A (84.29%) returned to social life, while 102 patients (81.94%) in group B. Group A mean VAS was 1.55, Group B mean VAS was 1.49. Conclusion: Comparison of the two group showed no differences. Complication percentages are in line with literature. Optimal reduction and fixation allow high percentage of healing and return to social life.

How much does saving femoral head cost after acetabular fracture? Comparison between ORIF and THA.

We performed a prospective study on patients with acetabular fractures treated either with internal fixation either with arthroplasty comparing clinical outcomes, quality of life, economic resources and cost efficacy in the first five years after surgery. Demographic data, diagnosis, index treatment, costs and subsequent surgeries were recorded. Patients were requested to fulfill Merle d'Aubigné and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. Clinical differences between treatments are significant only in discharge period. Comparing respectively group with fixation and arthroplasty, cost efficacy was 5483 and 10838 euros/quality-adjusted-life years, mean global costs 23965 and 16878 € and quality of life gained in five years 2.788 and 3.175. Group of arthroplasty showed better quality of life at discharge and at one year. If choice between fixation and arthroplasty should be based only on cost-efficacy, arthroplasty should be suggested but clinical outcomes suggest to consider fixation because results at five years are not different to arthroplasty.