Vol 4 | Issue 1 | May – Aug 2018 | page: 25-28 | Ninad Ashok Godghate, Neha Ninad Godghate, Krishnamohan Ananda Saindane, Shriniwas Yemul, Shivraj Suryawanshi.
Author: Ninad Ashok Godghate  , Neha Ninad Godghate , Krishnamohan Ananda Saindane , Shriniwas Yemul , Shivraj Suryawanshi .
 Consultant Grace Ortho Clinic Rajiv Nagar T-Point Wardha Road, Nagpur.
 FICS, Consultant, Suyog Hospital, Sakri road, Dhule.
 Ashwini Rural Medical College and Research Centre, Kumbhari, Solapur
 Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon, Alexis Hospital Nagpur
Address of Correspondence
Dr. Ninad Godghate,
1, Satpute Layout, Somalwada, Wardha Road, Nagpur-440025
Introduction: Inspite of routine encounters, hip fractures have the capacity to perplex even experienced orthopaedic surgeons at times. Management of these fractures has evolved with time and soft tissue preserving techniques have gained importance. Through this study we have attempted to analyse the results of traditional dynamic condylar screw plate construct used in a biological manner for treatment of peritrochanteric hip fractures.
Material & Methods: 18 patients in the age group of 22 to 78 years with post traumatic unstable intertrochanteric or subtrochanteric fractures in a pre-operative normal limb were included. All cases were operated within 5 days of trauma and were advised non weight bearing mobilisation for 6 weeks.
Results: Union was achieved in all cases with average duration of 14.6 weeks. 14 patients regained pre-fracture activities.
0.5 cm lengthening was seen in 2 cases.
Conclusion: Biological plating with dynamic condylar screw plate construct is a good modality for treatment of peritrochanteric hip fractures. There is a learning curve like any other surgical technique and results can be improved over time with proper patient selection and planning.
Keywords: Biological, Dynamic condylar screw, unstable, Peritrochanteric fractures
1. Rohilla R, Singh R, Magu NK, Siwach RC, Sangwan SS. Mini-incision dynamic condylar screw fixation for comminuted subtrochanteric hip frcatures. Journal of orthopaedic surgery 2008; 16(2):150-5.
2. Saini P, Kumar R, Shekhawat V, Joshi N, Bansal M, Kumar S. Biological fixation of comminuted subtrochanteric fractures with proximal femur locking compression plate. Injury 2013; 44:226-31.
3. Vaidya SV, Dholakia DB, Chatterjee A. The use of dynamic condylar screw and biological reduction techniques for subtrochanteric femur fracture. Injury 2003; 34:123-8.
4. Boldin C, Seibert FJ, Fankhauser F, Peicha G, Grechenig W, Szyszkowitz R. The proximal femoral nail (PFN) – a minimal invasive treatment of unstable proximal femoral fractures: a prospective study of 55 patients with a follow-up of 15 months. Acta Orthop Scand 2003;74:53-8
5. Garnavos C, Peterman A, Howard PW. The treatment of difficult proximal femoral fractures with the Russell- Taylor reconstruction nail. Injury 1999;30:407-15
6. Palm H, Jacobsen S, Sonne-Holm S, Gebuhr P; Hip fracture study group. Integrity of the lateral femoral wall in intertrochanteric hip fratures: an important predictor of a reoperation. JBJS Am 2007 Mar; 89(3):470-5.
7. Krettek C, Schandelmaier P, Miclau T, Tscherne H. Minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO) using the DCS in proximal and distal femoral fractures. Injury Supplement 1997; 28(1):20-30.
8. Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969 Jun;51(4):737-55
9. Siebenrock KA, Muller U, Ganz R, Indirect reduction with condylar blade plate for osteosynthesis of subtrochanteric femoral fractures. Injury 1998; 29(Suppl 3):C7-15
10. Cooper C, Campion G, Melton LJ. Hip fractures in the elderly: a world-wide projection. Osteoporos Int. 1992; 2:285-9
11. Johnell O, Kanis JA. An estimate of the worldwide prevalence, mortality and disability associated with hip fracture. Osteoporos Int. 2004;15:897-902
12. Kulkarni GS, Limaye R, Kulkarni M, Kulkarni S. Current concept review Intertrochanteric fractures. Indian Journal of orthopaedics 2006; 40(1):16-23.
13. Pilson H, Carol E. Biological basis of minimally invasive osteosynthesis. In Tornetta P, editor. Minimally invasive orthopaedic trauma. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2014, p. 1-10.
14. Morshed S, Lin C, Krettek C, Miclau T III. Biological basis of minimally invasive osteosynthesis. In Tornetta P, editor. Minimally invasive orthopaedic trauma. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2014, p. 11-23.
15. Farouk O, Krettek C, Miclau T, Schandelmaier P, Guy P. The topography of the perforators of the deep femoral artery: a cadaver injection study. Orthopaedic trauma association (OTA), annual meeting Boston 1996; Abstract book 133-134
16. Schemitsch E., Turchin D., Kowalski M., Swiontkowski M. Quantitative assessment of bone injury and repair after reamed and unreamed locked intramedullary nailing. The journal of trauma: Injury, Infection and Critical care. 1998; 45:250-55
17. Leunig M, Hertel R, Siebenrock KA, Ballmer FT, Mast JW, Ganz R. The evolution of indirect reduction techniques for the treatment of fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;375:7-14
18. Perren SM. Evolution of the internal fixation of long bone fractures. The scientific basis of biological internal fixation: Choosing a new balance between stability and biology. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2002;84:1093-110
19. Steven P, Wade G, Allan SL. Subtrochanteric fractures. In Mohit Bhandari, editor. Evidence based Orthopaedics Vol.II. Wiley Blackwell; 2012: p 502
20. Kinast C, Bolhofner BR, Mast JW, Ganz R. Subtrochanteric fractures of the femur. Results of treatment with the 95 degrees condylar blade plate. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989; 238:122-30.
21. Kulkarni SS, Moran CG. Results of dynamic condylar screw for subtrochanteric fractures. Injury 2003; 34:117-22.
22. Nungu KS, Olerud C, Rehenberg L. Treatment of subtrochanteric fractures with the AO dynamic condylar screw. Injury 1993; 24:90-2
23. Arrington, Edward D, Smith, William J, Chambers, Henry G, Bucknell, Allan L, Davino, Nelson A. Complications of iliac crest bone graft harvesting. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996; 329:300-09
24. Appelt A, Suhm N, Baier M, Meeder PJ. Complications after intramedullary stabilization of proximal femur fractures: a retrospective analysis of 178 patients. Eur J Trauma and Emerg Surg 2007; 33:262-7.
25. Windolf J, Hollander D, Hakimi M, Linhart W. Pitfalls and complications in the use of the proximal femoral nail. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2005; 390:59-65.
26. Gotfred Y. The lateral trochanteric wall. Clin Orthop. 2004; 425:82-86.
27. Antonini G, Giancola R, Berruti D, Blanchietti E, Pecchia P, Francione V, Greco P, Russo TC, Pietrogrande L. Clinical and functional outcomes of PCCP study:a multicentre prospective study in Italy. Strat Traum Limb Recon. 2013; 8:13-20
28. Pai CH. Dynamic condylar screw for subtrochanteric fractures with greater trochanteric extension. J. Orthop. Trauma, 1996; 10:317-22
29. Sanders R, Regazzoni P. Treatment of subtrochanteric fractures using the dynamic condylar screw. J. Orthop Trauma. 1989; 3:206-13
|How to Cite this article: Godghate NA , Godghate NN, Saindane KA, Yemul S, Suryawanshi S. Biological dynamic condylar screw fixation for management of Peritrochanteric hip fractures. Trauma International May -Aug 2018;4(1):25-28.|