The Gotfried percutaneous compression plate compared with the conventional classic hip screw for the fixation of intertrochanteric fractures of the hip. A prospective, randomised study comparing the percutaneous compression plate and the compression hip screw for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures of the hip. The external fixator compared with the sliding hip screw for pertrochanteric fractures of the femur. Extramedullary fixation of 107 subtrochanteric fractures: a randomized multicenter trial of the Medoff sliding plate versus 3 other screw-plate systems. Extramedullary fixation of 569 unstable intertrochanteric fractures: a randomized multicenter trial of the Medoff sliding plate versus three other screw-plate systems. Comparison of the compression hip screw with the Medoff sliding plate for intertrochanteric fractures. Femoral shortening in intertrochanteric fractures. A comparison between the Medoff sliding plate and the compression hip screw. Dynamic hip screw compared with external fixation for treatment of osteoporotic pertrochanteric fractures. A prospective, randomized study. RAB-plate vs Richards CHS plate for unstable trochanteric hip fractures. A randomized study of 233 patients with 1-year follow-up. Functional outcome after intertrochanteric fractures of the femur: does the implant matter? A prospective study of 100 consecutive cases. Comparison between external fixation and sliding hip screw in the management of trochanteric fracture of the femur in Nepal. Intertrochanteric fractures of the femur: a randomized prospective trial comparing the Pugh nail with the dynamic hip screw. Gotfried percutaneous compression plating compared with sliding hip screw fixation of intertrochanteric hip fractures: a prospective randomized study. The Gotfried PerCutaneous Compression Plate versus the Dynamic Hip Screw in the treatment of pertrochanteric hip fractures: minimal invasive treatment reduces operative time and postoperative pain. Trochanteric fractures of the femur. A randomised prospective trial comparing the Jewett nail-plate with the dynamic hip screw.
We performed a randomised, prospective trial in 111 patients with intertrochanteric fractures of the hip comparing the use of the Gotfried percutaneous compression plate (PCCP) with that of the classic hip screw (CHS). Blood loss and transfusion requirement were less in the PCCP group but the operating time was significantly longer. The complication rate after operation was similar in both groups, and at a minimum follow-up of six months there was no difference in the rates of fracture healing or implant failure. The PCCP gives results which are similar to those obtained with a conventional device. Its suggested advantages seem to be theoretical rather than practical and, being a fixed-angle implant, it is not universally applicable. Limited access surgery is thought to reduce post-operative morbidity and provide faster recovery of function. The percutaneous compression plate (PCCP) is a recently introduced device for the fixation of intertrochanteric fractures with minimal exposure. It has several potential mechanical advantages over the conventional compression hip screw (CHS). Our aim in this prospective, randomised, controlled study was to compare the outcome of patients operated on using these two devices. We randomised 104 patients with intertrochanteric fractures (AO/OTA 31.A1-A2) to surgical treatment with either the PCCP or CHS and followed them for one year postoperatively. The mean operating blood loss was 161.0 ml (8 to 450) in the PCCP group and 374.0 ml (11 to 980) in the CHS group (Student's t-test, p < 0.0001). The pain score and ability to bear weight were significantly better in the PCCP group at six weeks post-operatively. Analysis of the radiographs in a proportion of the patients revealed a reduced amount of medial displacement in the PCCP group (two patients, 4%) compared with the CHS group (10 patients, 18.9%); Fisher's exact test, p < 0.02. The PCCP device was associated with reduced intra-operative blood loss, less postoperative pain and a reduced incidence of collapse of the fracture. In a prospective, randomised study we have compared the pertrochanteric external fixator (PF) with the sliding hip screw (SHS) in 100 consecutive patients who were allocated randomly to the two methods of treatment. Details of the patients and the patterns of fracture were similar in both groups. Follow-up was for six months. Use of the PF was associated with significantly less blood loss, a shorter operating time, reduced postoperative pain, shorter hospitalisation (p < 0.001), earlier mobilisation (p < 0.001) and a reduced rate of mechanical complications (p < 0.01). Superficial infection was significantly more common with the PF (p < 0.01), but without long-term adverse consequences. There were no differences in the healing of the fracture, mortality or final functional outcome. Our results indicate that the external fixator is an effective and safe device for treating pertrochanteric fractures and should be considered as a useful alternative to conventional fixation with the sliding hip screw. We compared the efficacy of a load-sharing device, the Medoff sliding plate (MSP), with that of 3 other load-bearing screw-plate devices for the fixation of subtrochanteric fractures in a randomized multicenter trial of 107 elderly patients. 55 fractures were operated on with the MSP, and 52 with the dynamic hip screw (DHS) with or without a trochanteric stabilizing plate (TSP) or with the dynamic condylar screw (DCS). The patient material in the groups was similar regarding age, domestic situation, preinjury walking ability and fracture types. We followed the patients clinically and radiographically for a minimum of 1 year. There was no significant difference in walking ability or return rate to the home at follow-up. Fixation failure occurred in 1/55 fractures operated on with the MSP, in 3/32 with the DHS, in 3/12 with the DCS and in 2/8 with the DHS/TSR The difference in the rate of fixation failure was statistically significant, when the MSP group was compared to the 3 load-bearing devices in the other group (1 vs 8). On the basis of this experience, we think that the load-sharing principle of the MSP, which seems to facilitate fracture impaction and stability, appears to be a good alternative in extramedullary fixation of subtrochanteric fractures. We compared the efficacy of the Medoff sliding plate (MSP) with 3 other screw-plate systems for fixation of unstable intertrochanteric fractures in a randomized multicenter trial of 569 elderly patients. The MSP has biaxial dynamic capacity along both the neck and the shaft of the femur unlike the other systems, which lack dynamic capacity along the shaft. 268 fractures were operated on with the MSP, and 301 with the dynamic hip screw (DHS), with or without a trochanteric stabilizing plate (DHS/TSP) or with the dynamic condylar screw (DCS). The MSP had recently been shown to the surgeons. The patients in the groups were similar as regards age, domestic situation, preinjury walking ability and type of fracture. We followed the patients clinically and radiographically for at least 1 year. There was no significant difference in walking ability at follow-up or rate of return to home. Fixation failure occurred in 18/268 fractures operated on with the MSP, in 8/238 with the DHS, in 3/49 with the DHS/TSP and in 1/14 with the DCS. The difference in the rate of fixation failure was not statistically significant when the MSP group was compared to the 3 other groups. In 14 of the 18 fixation failures in the MSP group, the biaxial dynamic capacity of the MSP had not been used due to technical errors by surgeons, unfamiliar with the new method. No selection bias was found regarding fracture types in the 2 subgroups of patients with correct or inadequate biaxial dynamization. Extramedullary fixation of unstable intertrochanteric fractures with these implants showed a low failure rate. When using the MSP, biaxial dynamization must be correctly performed. The Medoff sliding plate was designed to achieve compression along the femoral neck and the longitudinal axis of the femoral shaft theoretically to improve the treatment of intertrochanteric hip fractures. The Medoff sliding plate was compared with a standard compression hip screw in a randomized, prospective study for the fixation of 160 stable and unstable intertrochanteric fractures with an average followup of 9.5 months (range, 6-26 months). Overall, 91 fractures were treated using the compression hip screw and 69 were treated with the Medoff sliding plate. Stable fracture patterns (46) united without complication in both treatment groups. Unstable fractures (114) had an overall failure rate of 9.6%, 14% (nine patients) with the compression hip screw and 3% (two patients) with the Medoff plate; this difference was significantly different. The time to union for the 114 unstable fractures was not significantly different between the two devices. For all patients, no differences in lengths of hospitalization, return to ambulatory status before fracture, postoperative living status, or postoperative pain was observed between the two device groups. Use of the Medoff plate for all fracture types was associated with a significantly higher amount of blood loss and operating time. We compared 54 patients treated by a Medoff sliding plate (MSP) with 60 stabilised by a compression hip screw (CHS) in a prospective, randomised study of the management of intertrochanteric femoral fractures. Four months after the operation femoral shortening was determined from radiographs of both femora. In unstable fractures the mean femoral shortening was 15 mm with the MSP and 11 mm with the CHS (p = 0.03). A subgroup in which shortening was classified as large, comprising one-third of the patients in each group, had a similar extent of shortening, but more medialisation of the femoral shaft occurred in the CHS (26%) than in the MSP (12%) group (p = 0.03). Five postoperative failures of fixation occurred with the CHS and none with the MSP (p = 0.03). The marginally greater femoral shortening seen with the MSP compared with the CHS appeared to be justified by the improved control of impaction of the fracture. Biaxial dynamisation in unstable intertrochanteric fractures is a safe principle of treatment, which minimises the rate of postoperative failure of fixation. Although the use of a sliding hip screw is considered to be the preferred treatment for pertrochanteric femoral fractures, we theorized that external fixation could produce clinical outcomes equal to, if not better than, the outcomes obtained with conventional treatment. Furthermore, because external fixation is minimally invasive, we expected a lower rate of morbidity and a reduced need for blood transfusions. Therefore, we compared the two treatments in a clinical trial of elderly patients with pertrochanteric fracture.
                Forty consecutive elderly female patients who had a pertrochanteric fracture were randomized to be treated with either fixation with a 135 degrees four-hole sliding hip screw (Group A) or an external fixation device with hydroxyapatite-coated pins (Group B). The inclusion criteria were female gender, an age of at least sixty-five years, an AO/OTA type-A1 or A2 fracture, and a bone mineral density T-score of less than -2.5. There were no differences in patient age, fracture type, bone mineral density, comorbidities, length of hospital stay, or quality of reduction between the two groups.
                The average intraoperative time (and standard deviation) was 64 +/- 6 minutes in Group A and 34 +/- 5 minutes in Group B (p < 0.005). The average number of units of blood transfused postoperatively was 2.0 +/- 0.1 in Group A and none in Group B (p < 0.0001). Group B had less pain five days postoperatively (p < 0.05). Varus collapse of the fracture at six months averaged 6 degrees +/- 8 degrees in Group A and 2 degrees 1 degrees in Group B (p < 0.002). No pin-track infections occurred in Group B. The average Harris hip score at six months was 62 +/- 19 points in Group A and 63 +/- 17 points in Group B.
                This study showed that external fixation with hydroxyapatite-coated pins is an effective treatment for this fracture in this patient population. The operative time is brief, the blood loss is minimal, the fixation is adequate, and the reduction is maintained over time. We prospectively randomized 233 patients with unstable trochanteric hip fractures for treatment with a 120 degrees fixed angle blade-plate having a buttress rod (group A, n 111) or a 135 degrees compression hip screw (group B, n 122). The minimum follow-up time was 1 year. The ratio of technical failure was 9% in group A and 19% in group B (p = 0.06). 79 (87%) fractures in group A and 65 (68%) fractures in group B healed without any complication (p = 0.003). Malunion occurred in 2 cases in group A and in 15 cases in group B (p = 0.002). In a randomized study of 100 consecutive patients with an intertrochanteric fracture of the femur fixed internally either with a sliding hip screw or with a McLaughlin nail-plate, the functional outcome of the 6 months survivors has been analysed. There was no statistically significant difference between the two treatment groups with regard to the rehabilitation progress and recovery to the prefracture walking ability, pain and gait at 6 months. Of the 6 months survivors, 55 per cent whose fractures were unstable and 76 per cent whose fractures were stable regained 90 per cent or more of their individual prefracture walking ability. The incidence of failure by 'cutting-out', the reoperation rate and the mortality at 6 months were not statistically different in the two treatment groups. We conducted a randomised controlled trial to compare external fixation of trochanteric fractures of the femur with the more costly option of the sliding hip screw. Patients in both groups were matched for age (mean 67 years, 50 to 100) and gender. We excluded all pathological fractures, patients presenting at more than one week, fractures with subtrochanteric extension or reverse obliquity, multiple fractures or any bone and joint disease interfering with rehabilitation. The interval between injury and operation, the duration of surgery, the amount of blood loss, the length of hospital stay and the cost of treatment were all significantly higher in the sliding hip screw group (p < 0.05). The time to union, range of movement, mean Harris hip scores and Western Ontario and McMaster University knee scores were comparable at six months. The number of patients showing shortening or malrotation was too small to show a significant difference between the groups. Pin-track infection occurred in 18 patients (60%) treated with external fixation, whereas there was a single case of wound infection (3.3%) in the sliding hip screw group. Over a 14-month period, 100 consecutive cases of intertrochanteric fracture were randomly allocated to be treated by either Pugh nail-plate or Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) fixation. Although there were 11 cases of malreduction and/or suboptimal positioning of the fixation device in the femoral head, only two of these gave long-term problems. Despite the difference in configuration of the devices and a considerable disparity in price, patient satisfaction and the incidence of untoward radiological features at an average of 6 months after surgery were similar in the two groups. A trifin-ended device would thus appear to be a reliable alternative to the more commonly used hip screw systems for intertrochanteric fracture. The use of a Gotfried percutaneous compression plate provides a minimally invasive technique for the fixation of intertrochanteric proximal femoral fractures. The purpose of this study was to determine if the percutaneous compression plate provided advantages compared with the sliding hip screw for treatment of A1 and A2 AO/OTA intertrochanteric proximal femoral fractures.
                An institutional review board-approved, prospective, randomized, single-blinded study was conducted at a level-I trauma center between July 2004 and September 2007. All patients who met the study criteria and provided informed consent were randomized to treatment with a sliding hip screw or percutaneous compression plate. Of the sixty-six patients who consented to participate, thirty-three were randomized to be treated with a sliding hip screw and thirty-three, with a percutaneous compression plate. Data evaluated included surgical time, incision length, blood loss, need for blood transfusion, and postoperative functional status. Follow-up included clinical findings, radiographs until healing was confirmed, functional and pain assessment scores, and the Short Form-36. The median follow-up period for surviving patients was thirty-six months.
                Sixty-six patients, forty-seven women and nineteen men, with a mean age of seventy-seven years were entered into the study. The treatment groups were similar with respect to study variables (p > 0.05). Operative times (forty-eight vs. seventy-eight minutes), incision length (56 vs. 82 mm), and blood loss (41 vs. 101 mL) significantly favored the percutaneous compression plate group (p < 0.001). The groups were similar immediately postoperatively; however, by discharge, fewer patients with a percutaneous compression plate required walking aids (40% vs. 59%). This trend continued throughout the study but was not significant. Pain with activity was lower throughout the study for the percutaneous compression plate group, but the difference was significant only at the three-month interval.
                Previously published reports showing shorter operative times and less blood loss with the percutaneous compression plate were reaffirmed. Compared with the sliding hip screw, the percutaneous compression plate resulted in a larger percentage of patients who were able to walk independently, consistently lower levels of pain with activity, and improved quality of life according to multiple scales of the Short Form-36, but the differences were not significant. Significant differences favoring the percutaneous compression plate were found with regard to operating times, incision length, and blood loss. The PerCutaneous Compression Plate (PCCP) was developed by Gotfried (Israel, Haifa) for minimal-approach osteosynthesis of pertrochanteric fractures.
                One hundred fifteen patients, aged 60 or more, with intertrochanteric fractures (AO type 31A1 or 31A2) were selected randomly for fixation with either the PCCP (53 patients) or the Dynamic Hip Screw (62 patients). All surviving patients were scheduled for a 1-year follow-up.
                Less invasive surgical stabilization of pertrochanteric fractures with the PCCP resulted in shorter theater and surgical time and reduced postoperative pain. The PCCP treatment showed a tendency toward a lower transfusion need and a reduction of fracture impaction; however, results were not statistically significant. There was a trend toward a higher mechanical complication rate with the PCCP: anatomic closed reduction without posterior sagging of the fracture and fluoroscopic control of the placement of the first neck screw in two directions are essential to avoid technical complications.
                Minimal invasive treatment of pertrochanteric fractures with the PCCP reduces operation time and postoperative pain. In a randomised prospective trial 98 elderly women with trochanteric fractures of the femur were treated with either a 135 degrees Jewett nail-plate or a 135 degrees Dynamic hip screw. The results at six weeks, three months and six months were statistically analysed. There were no significant differences in the two groups with regard to pain, length of hospital stay, morbidity or mortality. Although operative difficulties and open reduction were more common with the Dynamic hip screw, at the end of six months more patients in this group were mobile and there was significant radiological evidence of better compression without loss of fixation.
The markedly increased fixation failure rate of fixed nail plates compared with the SHS is a major consideration and thus the SHS appears preferable.
There was insufficient evidence from other comparisons of extramedullary implants or on the use of external fixators to draw definite conclusions.