Does proximal femoral nail antirotation achieve better outcome than previous-generation proximal femoral nail?

BACKGROUND There are few studies in the literature comparing the clinical outcomes and radiographic results of proximal femoral nail(PFN)and proximal femoral nail antirotation(PFNA)for pertrochanteric femoral fracture(PFF)in elderly patients.AIM To evaluate both clinical and radiographic outcomes after fixation with PFN and PFNA in an elderly patient population.METHODS One hundred fifty-eight patients older than 65 years with PFF who underwent fixation with either PFN or PFNA were included.Seventy-three patients underwent fixation with PFN,whereas 85 were fixed with PFNA.The mean follow-up was 2.4 years(range,1-7 years).Clinical outcome was measured in terms of operation time,postoperative function at each follow-up visit,and mortality within one year.Radiographic evaluation included reduction quality after surgery,Cleveland Index,tip-apex distance(TAD),union rate,time to union,and sliding distance of the screw or blade.Complications including nonunion,screw cutout,infection,osteonecrosis of the femoral head,and implant breakage were also investigated.RESULTS Postoperative function was more satisfactory in patients who underwent PFNA than in those who underwent PFN(P=0.033).Radiologically,the sliding difference was greater in PFN than in PFNA patients(6.1 and 3.2 mm,respectively,P=0.036).The rate of screw cutout was higher in the PFN group;eight for PFN(11.0%)and two for PFNA patients(2.4%,P=0.027).There were no differences between the two groups in terms of operation time,mortality rate at one year after the operation,adequacy of reduction,Cleveland Index,TAD,union rate,time to union,nonunion,infection,osteonecrosis,or implant breakage.CONCLUSION Elderly patients with PFF who underwent PFNA using a helical blade demonstrated better clinical and radiographic outcomes as measured by clinical score and sliding distance compared with patients who underwent PFN.

Arthroscopic treatment of iliopsoas tendinitis after total hip arthroplasty with acetabular cup malposition: Two case reports

BACKGROUND Optimal treatment for iliopsoas tendinitis after total hip arthroplasty(THA)with cup malposition,iliopsoas release alone or with cup revision,is controversial,particularly in young,active patients.Moreover,arthroscopic iliopsoas tendon(IPT)release in these patients has been rarely described,and midterm effects of this procedure on THA longevity and groin pain recurrence remain unclear.We performed arthroscopic IPT release after THA and report midterm outcomes in two young patients with acetabular cup malposition.CASE SUMMARY In the two patients,groin pain started early after THA.Physical examination revealed nonspecific findings,and laboratory tests showed no evidence of infection.Radiography and computed tomography showed reduced acetabular component anteversion angle and anterior cup prominence of more than 16 mm.For therapeutic diagnosis,ultrasonography-guided lidocaine with steroid was injected into the IPT sheath.In both patients,groin pain improved initially but worsened after a few months.Therefore,the patients underwent arthroscopic IPT release under spinal anesthesia.Arthroscopy revealed synovitis with fibrous tissues around the IPT and various lesions related to the implants after THA.IPT tenotomy and debridement with biopsy were performed;histopathologic studies showed chronic inflammation with synovial hyperplasia.Both patients were encouraged to start walking immediately after surgery,and they returned to complete daily function early after surgery.They experienced no recurrence of groin pain or any implant-related problems 5 years postoperatively.CONCLUSION Arthroscopic IPT release for cup malposition produced excellent midterm outcomes without recurrence of groin pain and implant-related problems.

Surgical strategy of the treatment of atypical femoral fractures

The atypical femoral fracture(AFF)has been attracting significant attention because of its increasing incidence;additionally,its treatment is challenging from biological and mechanical aspects.Although surgery is often required to manage complete AFFs,clear guidelines for the surgical treatment of AFFs are currently sparse.We reviewed and described the surgical treatment of AFFs and the surveillance of the contralateral femur.For complete AFFs,cephalomedullary intramedullary nailing spanning the entire length of the femur can be used.Various surgical techniques to overcome the femoral bowing common in AFFs include a lateral entry point,external rotation of the nail,and the use of a nail with a small radius of curvature,or a contralateral nail.In the case of a narrow medullary canal,severe femoral bowing,or pre-existing implants,plate fixation may be considered as an alternative.For incomplete AFFs,prophylactic fixation depends on several risk factors,such as a subtrochanteric location,presence of a radiolucent line,functional pain,and condition of the contralateral femur;the same surgical principles as those in complete AFFs can be applied.Finally,once AFF is diagnosed,clinicians should recognize the increased risk of contralateral AFFs,and close surveillance of the contralateral femur is recommended.