Avoidance of Malreduction of Proximal Femoral Shaft Fractures With the Use of a Minimally Invasive Nail Insertion Technique (MINIT)

Objectives: To determine our rate of malalignment in proximal femoral shaft fractures treated with intramedullary (IM) nails, with and without the use of a minimally invasive nail insertion technique (MINIT). Design: Retrospective study. Setting: Level 1 trauma center. Methods: Between July 1, 2003, and June 31, 2005, 100 consecutive proximal femoral shaft fractures (97 patients) were treated with IM nails. The average age of the 56 men and 41 women was 43.5 years (range, 17 to 96 years). There were 92 closed fractures and 8 open fractures. Fractures were classified according to the Russell-Taylor classification (69 type 1A, 11 type 1B, 3 type 2A, 17 type 2B). All patients underwent antegrade IM nailing using a fracture table in the supine (83) or lateral (17) position. A total of 72 entry portals were trochanteric, and 28 were piriformis. Seventy-seven percent of the femurs were opened with MINIT, a technique that uses a percutaneous cannulated channel reamer over a guide pin as opposed to the standard method of Kuntscher, which employs a femoral awl. Nails were locked proximally using standard locking in 37 fractures, and recon mode in 63. Fracture reduction was examined on immediate postoperative films to determine angulation in the coronal and sagittal planes. Criteria for acceptable reduction were less than 5 degrees angulation in any plane. In addition, surgical position, entry portal, mechanism of injury, Russell-Taylor classification, OTA classification, open or closed fracture, open or closed reduction, and type of implant used were analyzed for significance. Results: The frequency of malalignment was 10% for the entire group of patients. Malalignment occurred in 26% of fractures treated without the use of the MINIT and in 5.2% when the MINIT was used (P < 0.01). There was no statistically significant difference between the different Russell-Taylor fracture types, although there was a trend towards more malalignment in type 2A and 2B fractures (P = 0.06). None of the other factors studied had a statistically significant effect on malalignment. A whole-model test of the factors that were surgeon-controlled (use of the MINIT, surgical position, open or closed reduction, type of implant used, and entry portal) found that only use of the MINIT had a statistically significant effect on malalignment (P < 0.01). Conclusions: The results indicate that use of the minimally invasive nail insertion technique (MINIT) significantly decreases the occurrence of malalignment in proximal femoral shaft fractures.

[1]  S. Sims Subtrochanteric Femoral Fractures , 2002 .

[2]  M. Bhandari,et al.  Treatment of Distal Tibia Fractures Without Articular Involvement: A Systematic Review of 1125 Fractures , 2006, Journal of orthopaedic trauma.

[3]  W. Brien,et al.  Subtrochanteric fractures of the femur. Results of treatment by interlocking nailing. , 1992, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[4]  J. T. Smith,et al.  Treatment of comminuted femoral subtrochanteric fractures using the Russell-Taylor reconstruction intramedullary nail. , 1991, Orthopedics.

[5]  D. Verettas,et al.  Fractures of the proximal part of the femur in patients under 50 years of age. , 2002, Injury.

[6]  C. Robinson,et al.  Trochanteric-entry long cephalomedullary nailing of subtrochanteric fractures caused by low-energy trauma. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[7]  R. Sanders,et al.  Trochanteric Nail Insertion for the Treatment of Femoral Shaft Fractures , 2005, Journal of orthopaedic trauma.

[8]  L. Anderson,et al.  A preliminary experience with the Russell-Taylor reconstruction nail for complex femoral fractures. , 1992, The Journal of trauma.

[9]  M. McAndrew,et al.  The Reconstruction Locked Nail for Complex Fractures of the Proximal Femur , 1995, Journal of Orthopaedics and Trauma.

[10]  K. Christensen,et al.  Cephalomedullary Nails in the Treatment of High-energy Proximal Femur Fractures in Young Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Comparison of Trochanteric Versus Piriformis Fossa Entry Portal , 2006, Journal of orthopaedic trauma.

[11]  F. Kummer,et al.  Effect of piriformis versus trochanteric starting point on fixation stability of short intramedullary reconstruction nails. , 2001, Bulletin (Hospital for Joint Diseases (New York, N.Y.)).

[12]  A. Tencer,et al.  Biomechanical Factors Affecting Fracture Stability and Femoral Bursting in Closed Intramedullary Nailing of Femoral Shaft Fractures, with Illustrative Case Presentations , 1987, Journal of orthopaedic trauma.

[13]  D. Pienkowski,et al.  A mechanical comparison of subtrochanteric femur fracture fixation. , 1998, Journal of orthopaedic trauma.

[14]  T. Bredbenner,et al.  Subtrochanteric Fixation Stability Depends on Discrete Fracture Surface Points , 2005, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[15]  J. Pournaras,et al.  Antegrade interlocking nailing of humeral shaft fractures , 2004, Journal of orthopaedic science : official journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association.

[16]  M. McKee,et al.  Treatment of Acute Midshaft Clavicle Fractures: Systematic Review of 2144 Fractures: On behalf of the Evidence-Based Orthopaedic Trauma Working Group , 2005, Journal of orthopaedic trauma.

[17]  A. Moroz,et al.  Evolution of the Koch model of the biomechanics of the hip: clinical perspective , 2002, Journal of orthopaedic science : official journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association.

[18]  M. Liebergall,et al.  Proximal tibial fractures--should we nail them? , 2001, American journal of orthopedics.

[19]  D. Kashiwagi,et al.  [Practice of intramedullary nailing]. , 1971, Shujutsu. Operation.

[20]  G. Horne Subtrochanteric fractures of the femur. , 1990, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[21]  J. Koebke,et al.  Antegrade femoral nailing: an anatomical determination of the correct entry point. , 2002, Injury.

[22]  R. Ostrum,et al.  A Critical Analysis of the Eccentric Starting Point for Trochanteric Intramedullary Femoral Nailing , 2005, Journal of orthopaedic trauma.

[23]  K. Vihtonen,et al.  Second-generation cephalomedullary nails in the treatment of reverse obliquity intertrochanteric fractures of the proximal femur. , 2004, Injury.

[24]  M. Swiontkowski,et al.  Fractures of the proximal part of the femur. , 1994, Instructional course lectures.

[25]  Asheesh Bedi,et al.  Subtrochanteric femur fractures. , 2004, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[26]  R. Sanders,et al.  Angular Malalignment After Intramedullary Nailing of Femoral Shaft Fractures , 2001, Journal of orthopaedic trauma.

[27]  P. Duwelius,et al.  Comparison of reconstruction nails for high subtrochanteric femur fracture fixation. , 1997, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[28]  C. Roberts,et al.  Second Generation Intramedullary Nailing of Subtrochanteric Femur Fractures: A Biomechanical Study of Fracture Site Motion , 2002, Journal of orthopaedic trauma.