Femoral neck fracture osteosynthesis: comparative study between biplan double support screw fixation method and inverted triangle conventional method | ||||
| Benha Journal of Applied Sciences | ||||
| Article 79, Volume 8, Issue 2, February 2023, Page 127-137 PDF (886.73 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Research Papers | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/bjas.2023.216949.1189 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Elsayed Mohammadi; Mahmoud Qandil; Emad Hussein; Islam Saad 
| ||||
| Orthopedic Surgery Dept., Faculty of Medicine, Benha University | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Background: The rate of femoral neck fractures increases constantly among the aging population. The primary goal of this research was to evaluate the role of biplan double-support screws fixation (BDSF) method in comparison to inverted triangle cannulated compression screws (ICCS) for treatment of femoral neck fractures. Methods: This study included 30 patients who suffered from fracture of the neck of the femur 15 patients treated by internal fixation using the method of BDSF and 15 patients treated by ICCS. All patients were subjected to detailed history, Physical examination, and Radiological examination (Standard AP and lateral plain X-ray, AP in internal rotation when needed), CT scan when X-ray didn’t show fracture Results: There was a significant relation between hospital stay (P=0.001) and complications (P=0.031), and the method of fixation. There was statistically significant relation between time till union and the outcome in BPDS group and ICCS group (P=0.012, P=0.001 respectively). There was statistically significant relation between Harris score of the fracture and the complication in BPDS group (P=0.031). There was statistically significant relation between Pawel classification, time till union, Harris score of the fracture and the complication in ICCS group (P=0.027, 0.010, and Conclusions: BDSF method is biomechanically better than inverted triangle method by providing additional cortical support & increasing fixation strength. Even in uncooperative patients, the BDSF-method offers accurate fixation, early recovery, and outstanding long-term results. Background: The rate of femoral neck fractures increases constantly among the aging population. The primary goal of this research was to evaluate the role of biplan double-support screws fixation (BDSF) method in comparison to inverted triangle cannulated compression screws (ICCS) for treatment of femoral neck fractures. Methods: This study included 30 patients who suffered from fracture of the neck of the femur 15 patients treated by internal fixation using the method of BDSF and 15 patients treated by ICCS. All patients were subjected to detailed history, Physical examination, and Radiological examination (Standard AP and lateral plain X-ray, AP in internal rotation when needed), CT scan when X-ray didn’t show fracture Results: There was a significant relation between hospital stay (P=0.001) and complications (P=0.031), and the method of fixation. There was statistically significant relation between time till union and the outcome in BPDS group and ICCS group (P=0.012, P=0.001 respectively). There was statistically significant relation between Harris score of the fracture and the complication in BPDS group (P=0.031). There was statistically significant relation between Pawel classification, time till union, Harris score of the fracture and the complication in ICCS group (P=0.027, 0.010, and | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Femoral Neck Fracture; Biplan Double Support Screw Fixation; Inverted Triangle Conventional Method; Osteosynthesis | ||||
|
Supplementary Files
|
||||
|
Statistics Article View: 89 PDF Download: 299 |
||||
