Comparison of proximal femoral nail Antirotation (PFNA) with dynamic condylar screw (DCS) in the treatment of unstable peritrocentric femoral fractures in patients of Shohada Hospital in Tabriz in years 2018 to 2022

Abstract

The results of various studies indicate the effectiveness of DCS and PFNA methods; However, the comparative results between these two methods in different societies have been associated with different results; Therefore, it is necessary to compare the use of these two methods for each treatment center; Since Shahada Medical Training Center is the largest center in northwest Iran and has a large number of patients for surgery of peritrochanteric fractures, it is necessary to use two methods, PFNA and DCS, which are common methods for this type of fractures. It allows to review in terms of short-term and long-term results to report a suitable method. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare proximal femoral nail Antirotation (PFNA) with dynamic confylar screw (DCS) in the treatment of peritrochanteric femur fractures in Shahada Hospital patients. Materials and Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted by examining the treatment results of patients with peritrochanteric fractures of the femur during the years 2018 to 2022 at Shahada Medical Training Center in Tabriz. Then the patients were divided into two groups based on the type of peritrochanteric fracture stabilization method; For one group, the stabilization method with the help of DCS was used, and for the other group, the PFNA method was used to stabilize the fracture, and their results were compared. Results: The duration of surgery, the duration of anesthesia, the length of stay in the hospital and the number of blood bags used between the two groups indicated that the duration of surgery, the duration of anesthesia, the amount of bleeding, the number of blood bags injected and The duration of follow-up in DCS group patients was significantly longer than in PFNA group patients. The degree of satisfaction of the surgery based on the doctor's opinion, clinical examination and medical imaging indicated that the good results in the PFNA group were non-significantly better than the DCS group. The amount of non-union in the patients of the PFNA group was non-significantly higher than that of the DCS group, while the infection and failure of the implant requiring surgery was non-significantly higher in the patients receiving DCS than the patients receiving PFNA.