Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2

"Kissing Nail Technique" for the exchange of intramedullary implants in adjacent peri-implant fractures

Pages
488–491
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The DFN was slowly pulled backwards and fragment stability was maintained, while both nailspassed the distal non-union.The Kissing Nail Technique allows simple, safe and fast reduction of all instable fragments, precise andeasy positioning of the proximal entry point by the retrograde guide wire, a minimally invasive procedure, and stableŞxation of a periprosthetic fracture.We found this new customized procedure accommodating to the unique anatomical features of asingle patient, that can be applied as a strategy especially for osteoporotic patients with periprostheticfractures.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:One third of the people aged 65 years and over fall every year, and 1e5% of these falls result in a fracture.For these people, history of fracture and surgery become a risk factor for recurrent falls.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This requires customizedŞxation techniques to ensure stability.The technique wasŞrst performed in an 81-year old female patient presenting with a dislocatedproximal femoral fracture at the tip of a previously implanted distal femoral nail (DFN), and non-union ofthe old fracture.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The DFN was slowly pulled backwards and fragment stability was maintained, while both nailspassed the distal non-union.The Kissing Nail Technique allows simple, safe and fast reduction of all instable fragments, precise andeasy positioning of the proximal entry point by the retrograde guide wire, a minimally invasive procedure, and stableŞxation of a periprosthetic fracture.We found this new customized procedure accommodating to the unique anatomical features of asingle patient, that can be applied as a strategy especially for osteoporotic patients with periprostheticfractures.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

One third of the people aged 65 years and over fall every year, and 1e5% of these falls result in a fracture.For these people, history of fracture and surgery become a risk factor for recurrent falls. In osteoporoticpatients, repeated fractures often require several osteosynthetic procedures within a short time frame.Despite the lack of biomechanical studies, clinical experience suggests that additional fractures adjacentto implants occur because of the difference in stiffness between the metallic implant and the osteoporotic bone. This requires customizedŞxation techniques to ensure stability.The technique wasŞrst performed in an 81-year old female patient presenting with a dislocatedproximal femoral fracture at the tip of a previously implanted distal femoral nail (DFN), and non-union ofthe old fracture. For this technique, the DFN was advanced until it passed the proximal fracture, therebyreducing both fractures, while a lateral femoral nail (LFN), extra-long and 3 mm thicker than the DFN,was introduced and advanced distally. The LFN was implanted in a"kissing nail technique," meaning thetips of the two nails were touching each other, and all fracture fragments were held in functionalreduction. The DFN was slowly pulled backwards and fragment stability was maintained, while both nailspassed the distal non-union.The Kissing Nail Technique allows simple, safe and fast reduction of all instable fragments, precise andeasy positioning of the proximal entry point by the retrograde guide wire, a minimally invasive procedure, and stableŞxation of a periprosthetic fracture.We found this new customized procedure accommodating to the unique anatomical features of asingle patient, that can be applied as a strategy especially for osteoporotic patients with periprostheticfractures.

🔖

Cite This Article

MELCHER, C., DELHEY, P. R., BİRKENMAİER, C., THALLER, P. H. (2026). "Kissing Nail Technique" for the exchange of intramedullary implants in adjacent peri-implant fractures. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 488–491. https://ajindex.com/articles/353519

References (2)

  1. Davison ]. Bond ]. Dawson P, Steen IN. Kenny RA, Patients with recurrent falls attending Accident Emergency benefit from multifactorial intervention--a randomised controlled trial. Age Ageing. 2005:34(2):162--168. Masud T, Morris RO. Epidemiology of falls. Age Ageing. 2001;30(suppl 4):3--7. Komadina R. The hip fracture is an injury and disease at the same time. Zdrav Vestn. 2008;77(lV):3--10. Nevitt MC, Cummings SR, Kidd 5, Black D. Risk factors for recurrent nonsyncopal falls. prospective study. ]AMA. 1989;261(18):2663--2668. Bloem BR. Boers [. Cramer M, Westendorp RG, Gerschlager W. Falls in the elderly. 1. Identification of risk factors. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2001;113(10): 352--362. Tromp AM, SmitJH, Deeg DJ, Bouter LM, Lips P. Predictors for falls and fractures in the longitudinal aging study Amsterdam,] Bone Min Res. 1998;13(12): 1932--1939.
  2. Sri--on J, Tirrell GP. Bean JF, Lipsitz IA, Liu SW. Revisit, subsequent hospitali-- zation, recurrent fall, and death within months after fall among elderly emergency department patients. Ann Emerg Med, 2017;70(4), 516.e2--521.e2. Boonen S. Autier P. Barette M, Vanderschueren D, Lips P, Haentjens P. Functional outcome and quality of life following hip fracture in elderly women: prospective controlled study. Osteoporos Int. 2004;15(2):87--94, Brenneman SK, Barrett--Connor E, Sajjan S. Markson LE, Siris ES. Impact of recent fracture on health--related quality of life in postmenopausal women. Bone Miner Res. 2006;21(6):809--816. Orive M. Aguirre U. Garcia--Gutierrez S, et al. Changes in health--related quality of life and activities of daily living after hip fracture because of fall in elderly patients: prospective cohort study. Int] Clin Pract. 2015;69(4):491--500. Baumgaertner MR. Curtin SL, Lindskog DM. lntramedullary versus extra-- medullary fixation for the treatment of intertrochanteric hip fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;(348):87--94. Weiser L, Ruppel AA, Nijchtern JV, et al, Extra-- vs. intramedullary treatment of pertrochanteric fractures: biomechanical in vitro study comparing dynamic hip screw and intramedullary nail. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2015;135(8): 101 --1 106. Zou J, Xu Y, Yang H. comparison of proximal femoral nail antirotation and dynamic hip screw devices in trochanteric fractures. Int Med Res. 2009:37(4): 1057--1064. Arirachakaran A, Amphansap T, Thanindratarn P, et al. Comparative outcome of PFNA, Gamma nails, PCCP, Medoff plate, LISS and dynamic hip screws for fix-- ation in elderly tr