Interest of Surgical Treatment of Per-Trochanteric Fractures by Gamma Nail: About 100 Cases
PDF

Keywords

fractures
osteosynthesis
gamma nail
trochanteric

Abstract

Gamma nail closed osteosynthesis has surpassed several methods previously used in the treatment of fractures in the trochanteric region.          The objective of the research was to carry out an epidemiological study and to assess the evolutionary profile of patients with per-trochanteric fracture treated with gamma nail.          Materials and methods. In this retrospective study, we report the experience of the Traumatology-Orthopedics Service II of the Military Teaching Hospital Mohamed V-Rabat, in the treatment of per-trochanteric fractures by gamma nail in 100 cases, collected between January 2011 and March 2016.          Results. The average age of our patients was 68 years, with a male predominance of 67%. The most reported etiology (92% of cases) was simple drop. Stable fractures were the most common (81%), with a predominance of simple per-trochanteric fractures. The average response time was 24 hours, the average duration of the surgical procedure was 45 minutes. The rate of infectious complications was 1%; the rate of mechanical complications was 1%. The functional results were excellent and good in 95% of cases. The average consolidation time was 8 weeks.          Conclusions. Trochanteric fracture is a delayed emergency which is seen primarily in the elderly. The gamma nail represents one of the latest improvements in implants for the treatment of these fractures. We report a series of 100 cases of trochanteric fractures treated surgically by gamma nail. The functional results were very encouraging compared to those reported in the literature.  
https://doi.org/10.21802/gmj.2018.4.4
PDF

References

Penot P, Bezon E, Lenen D. Osteosynthesis of trochanteric fractures. About 390 fractures. Journal of Orthopedic Surgery. 1992;171.

Baudoin C, Rardellone P, Mer F, Sebert JL. Devenir à court et à moyen terme (2 ans) des fractures de l'extrémité supérieure du fémur. Analyse des différentes conséquences. Collection of locomotor pathology. Paris: Masson; 1991;217-220.

Kempf I, Grosse A, Taglang G. The Gamma nail in the treatment of trochanteric fractures: Indications and results, a study of 121 cases. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1993;79(1):29-40. [published in French]

Boukhriss J, Boussouga M, Jaafar A et al. Interest of the surgical treatment of fractures of the trochanteric mass by gamma nail, about 84 cases. Pan Afr Med J. 2014;19:6. [5] [published in French] DOI: https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2014.19.6.3190

Forthomme JP, Costenoble V, Soete P, Docquier J. Treatment of trochanteric fractures of the femur using the gamma nail (apropos of a series of 92 cases). Acta Orthop Belg. 1993;59(1):22-29. [published in French] [PMid:8484318]

Hadounne AR, Messoudi A, Nechad M et al. Les fractures sous trochantériennes à propos de 42 cas. Rev Maroc Chir Orthop Trauma 2006;27:18-21.

Scheerlinck T, Haentjens P. Fractures of the upper end of the femur in adults. EMC - Appareil locomoteur. 2003;1(1):10-23. [published in French]

Pibarot V, Bejui-Hugues J. Fractures of the trochanteric mass (femoral prosthesis excepted). Encycl Méd Chir. 2001;13:44-620.

Badila AE, Radulescu R, Nutiu O et al. Gamma nail versus DHS in the treatment of trochanteric fractures. Journal of orthopedic surgery and traumatological. 2004;90(5):1181. [published in French]

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.