Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

, Volume 125, Issue 3, pp 184–187 | Cite as

Avoiding rotational malalignment after fractures of the femur by using the profile of the lesser trochanter: an in vitro study

  • R. L. Jaarsma
  • N. Verdonschot
  • R. van der Venne
  • A. van Kampen
Original Article
First Online:
Received:

Abstract

Introduction

Intramedullary (IM) nailing has become the preferred method of treatment for femoral shaft fractures in adults. Rotational malalignment is an important complication, established during operation. The incidence of rotational malalignment (≥15°) has been reported to be between 20% and 30%. It might be avoided intra-operatively by using quantitative imaging techniques, with the profile of the contralateral lesser trochanter serving as a reference.

Materials and methods

With the help of a C-arm image intensifier, five surgeons tried to determine the neutral state of ten prepared cadaver femora. They could only look at the C-arm screen and were blinded to the actual femur. Per observer three measurements were done per femur. The first measurement (method I) was done without a reference, while the second (method II) used a reference image of the femur in a neutral state. The third method (method III) added a lesser trochanter quantifying computer program. After positioning of the femur, the difference in rotational state compared with the neutral state was measured with an inclinometer.

Results

Without reference, malrotations up to 27° were found. Methods II and III proved to be significantly better (p<0.0001). These two methods showed malrotation of 2.2° (±1.5°) and 2.3° (±1.7°), respectively. External or internal malrotation occurred with all three methods equally frequently. No difference was found between observers.

Conclusions

Using the contralateral lesser trochanter as a reference is an accurate method to minimize malrotation of a femur. Quantifying the profile of the lesser trochanter with computer assistance did not improve these results. Clinical results in the future still have to support these in vitro findings.

Keywords

Rotational malalignment Femoral fracture Fluoroscopy Lesser trochanter 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgement

The human femora were kindly provided by Spierings Medical Techniques BV (Nijmegen, The Netherlands).

References

  1. 1.
    Alho A, Strømsøe, Ekeland A (1991) Locked intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures. J Trauma 31:49–59Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bråten M, Terjesen T, Rossvoll I (1993) Torsional deformity after intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 75:799–803PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Christie J, Court-Brown C, Kinninmonth AWG, Howie CR (1989) Intramedullary locking nails in the management of femoral shaft fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 70:206–210Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deshmukh RG, Lou KK, Neo CB, Yew KS, Rozman I, George J (1998) A technique to obtain correct rotational alignment during closed locked intramedullary nailing of the femur. Injury 29:207–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hammer A (2002) Triangular structure of the proximal femur. Clin Anat 15:210–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hoaglund FT, Low WD (1980) Anatomy of the femoral neck and head with comparative data from Caucasians and Hong Kong Chinese. Clin Orthop 152:10–16Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jaarsma RL, Pakvis DFM, Verdonschot N et al (2004) Rotational malalignment after intramedullary nailing of femoral fractures. J Orthop Trauma 18:403–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Khang G, Choi K, Kim CS, Yang JS, Bae TS (2003) A study of Korean femoral geometry. Clin Orthop 406:116–122Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim JJ, Kim E, Kim KY (2001) Predicting the rotationally neutral state of the femur by comparing the shape of the contralateral lesser trochanter. Orthopedics 24:1069–1070Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Krettek C, Schandelmaier P, Guy P, Könemann B, Tscherne H (1996) Unreamed intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures: operative technique and early clinical experience with standard locking option. Injury 27:233–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Krettek C, Mannß J, Miclau T, Schandelmaier P, Linnemann I, Tscherne H (1998) Deformation of femoral nails with intramedullary insertion. J Orthop Res 16:572–575Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sennerich T, Sutter P, Ritter G, Zapf S (1992) Computertomographische Kontrolle des Antetorsionwinkels nach Oberschenkelschaftfrakturen des Erwachsenen. Unfallchirurg 95:301–305PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sim E, Höcker K (1992) Locked nailing of fractures of the femur—an analysis of problems and faults in 80 cases. Unfallchirug 95:626–633Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Søjbjerg JO, Eiskjaer S, Møller-Larsen F (1990) Locked nailing of comminuted and unstable fractures of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br 72:23–25Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sveningsen S, Nesse O, Finsen V (1986) Intramedullary nailing versus AO-plate fixation in femoral shaft fractures. Acta Orthop Scand 57:609Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tornetta P, Ritz G, Kantor A (1995) Femoral torsion after interlocked nailing of unstable femoral fractures. J Trauma 38:213–219Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Winquist RA, Hansen ST, Clawson DK (1984) Closed intramedullary nailing of femoral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 66:529–539PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wiss DA, Fleming CH, Matta JM, Clarck D (1986) Comminuted and rotationally unstable fractures of the femur treated with an interlocking nail. Clin Orthop 212:35–47Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. L. Jaarsma
    • 1
  • N. Verdonschot
    • 1
  • R. van der Venne
    • 1
  • A. van Kampen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryRadboud University, Medical CentreNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations