Journals / Joint diseases and related surgery / 2020 / Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 3

A new proximal femoral nail antirotation design: Is it effective in preventing varus collapse and cut-out?

Pages
426–431
Publication Date
2022-10-19
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 stress on the tip of the lag screw was found to be 49 mpa in the classic PFNA design, while in the new design PFNA it was found as 28 mpa with a decrease of more than 40%.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: This study aims to compare the mechanical features of the existing proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) system and the new PFNA system that we designed using three-dimensional (3D) finite element analysis.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and methods: This experimental study was conducted between 2019 and 2020.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The stress on the tip of the lag screw was found to be 49 mpa in the classic PFNA design, while in the new design PFNA it was found as 28 mpa with a decrease of more than 40%.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2019 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to compare the mechanical features of the existing proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) system and the new PFNA system that we designed using three-dimensional (3D) finite element analysis. Materials and methods: This experimental study was conducted between 2019 and 2020. We constructed two femur models with Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) type A1 fractures using 3D computed tomography scans. The new and standard PFNA designs were inserted into the femur models and subsequently transferred to the program. We investigated the distribution of stress on the tip of the lag screw, the calcar region, lag screw-nail junction, and the additional screw inserted through the greater trochanter (only present in the new PFNA design) using 3D finite element analysis. Results: When the von Mises stress distributions in our models were examined, the maximum stress at the lag screw-nail junction was 18 mpa in the new design PFNA, while it was 20 mpa in the classic PFNA model. The maximum stress at the junction of the additional screw that had greater trochanter inlet with the nail was found as 42.5 mpa. The maximum stress on the calcar region was found to be 10 mpa at the new design PFNA, while it was 13 mpa with 30% increase in the classic PFNA. The stress on the tip of the lag screw was found to be 49 mpa in the classic PFNA design, while in the new design PFNA it was found as 28 mpa with a decrease of more than 40%. Conclusion: As per our findings, the new PFNA design leads to reduced stress on the lag screw-nail junction, the calcar region, and the tip of the lag screw.

🔖

Cite This Article

DURUSOY, S., ÖNER, K., ÖZER, A. (2022). A new proximal femoral nail antirotation design: Is it effective in preventing varus collapse and cut-out?. Joint diseases and related surgery, Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 3, 426–431. https://ajindex.com/articles/559311

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Bozkurt HH, Tokgöz MA, Yapar A, Atik OŞ. What is the importance of canal-to-diaphysis ratio on osteoporosisrelated hip fractures? Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi 2019;30:296-300
  2. Siddiqui YS, Khan AQ, Asif N, Khan MJ, Sherwani MKA. Modes of failure of proximal femoral nail (PFN) in unstable trochanteric fractures. MOJ Orthop Rheumatol 2019;11:7-16
  3. Sidhu AS, Singh AP, Singh AP, Singh S. Total hip replacement as primary treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients. Int Orthop 2010;34:789-92
  4. Hassankhani EG, Omidi-Kashani F, Hajitaghi H, Hassankhani GG. How to Treat the Complex Unstable Intertrochanteric Fractures in Elderly Patients? DHS or Arthroplasty. Arch Bone Jt Surg 2014;2:174-9
  5. Kamboj P, Sharma PK, Jesadia B, Arora S, Siwach RC. A comparative prospective study of osteosynthesis in intertrochanteric fractures, using dynamic hip screw (DHS) and proximal femoral nailing (PFN). International Journal of Orthopaedics Sciences 2019;5:954-60
  6. Sharma A, Mahajan A, John B. A Comparison of the Clinico-Radiological Outcomes with Proximal Femoral Nail (PFN) and Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation (PFNA) in Fixation of Unstable Intertrochanteric Fractures. J Clin Diagn Res 2017;11:RC05-RC09
  7. Mallya S, Kamath SU, Madegowda A, Krishnamurthy SL, Jain MK, Holla R. Comparison of radiological and functional outcome of unstable intertrochanteric femur fractures treated using PFN and PFNA-2 in patients with osteoporosis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2019;29:1035-42
  8. Wang J, Ma JX, Lu B, Bai HH, Wang Y, Ma XL. Comparative finite element analysis of three implants fixing stable and unstable subtrochanteric femoral fractures: Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation (PFNA), Proximal Femoral Locking Plate (PFLP), and Reverse Less Invasive Stabilization System (LISS). Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2020;106:95-101
  9. Andruszkow H, Frink M, Frömke C, Matityahu A, Zeckey C, Mommsen P, et al. Tip apex distance, hip screw placement, and neck shaft angle as potential risk factors for cut-out failure of hip screws after surgical treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. Int Orthop 2012;36:2347-54
  10. Yaozeng X, Dechun G, Huilin Y, Guangming Z, Xianbin W. Comparative study of trochanteric fracture treated with the proximal femoral nail anti-rotation and the third generation of gamma nail. Injury 2010;41:1234-8
  11. Strauss E, Frank J, Lee J, Kummer FJ, Tejwani N. Helical blade versus sliding hip screw for treatment of unstable intertrochanteric hip fra