Prevention of inaccurate targeting of proximal screws during reconstruction femoral nailing

  • Ji Wan Kim
  • Derly O. Cuellar
  • Jiandong Hao
  • Benoit Herbert
  • Cyril Mauffrey
Original Article • HIP - TRAUMA
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to identify the underlying cause by simulating the forces involved in a controlled laboratory setting, and then to illustrate some intraoperative tips on how to detect this malalignment and suggest solutions prevent this intraoperative complication.

Methods

The Expert Asian Femoral Nail (A2FN) and Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation (PFNA) reconstruction nail systems were evaluated to compare the characteristics of each nailing system and their reactions to soft tissue tension at the time of proximal reconstruction screw placement. Soft tissue tension was simulated by placing a fulcrum under the distal drill sleeve and exerting a load on the targeting device via the addition of weights. The occurrence and degree of guide malalignment were determined while gradually increasing the weight.

Results

When soft tissue tension was simulated on the drill/guide sleeve of the A2FN, the drill sleeve deviated from the proximal screw hole proportionally to the weight applied and the K-wire guide passed outside of the nail at a weight of 7 kg. However, the drill sleeve of the PFNA was aligned exactly to the center of nail axis and the K-wire passed cleanly through the proximal locking hole regardless of weight applied.

Conclusions

Inaccurate guidance of the screw-targeting device can be caused by soft tissue tension. Thus, the authors recommend that careful attention be placed on minimizing soft tissue tension during proximal screw placement while using the targeting device of the A2FN system.

Keywords

Femur Subtrochanteric fracture Reconstruction nail Targeting device Complication 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

This experimental study does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors. In case illustration, informed consent was obtained from the patient for the publication of this study.

Conflict of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Menezes DF, Gamulin A, Noesberger B (2005) Is the proximal femoral nail a suitable implant for treatment of all trochanteric fractures? Clin Orthop Relat Res 439:221–227CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Robinson CM, Houshian S, Khan LA (2005) Trochanteric-entry long cephalomedullary nailing of subtrochanteric fractures caused by low-energy trauma. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(10):2217–2226. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02898 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sadowski C, Lubbeke A, Saudan M, Riand N, Stern R, Hoffmeyer P (2002) Treatment of reverse oblique and transverse intertrochanteric fractures with use of an intramedullary nail or a 95 degrees screw-plate: a prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A(3):372–381PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Inglis MB, Jaarsma R (2008) Intramedullary hip screw fixation of reverse oblique and transverse trochanteric femur fractures. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 18(5):323–326. doi: 10.1007/s00590-008-0309-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Muñoz-Mahamud E, García-Oltra E, Fernández-Valencia JA, Zumbado JA, Ríos J, Suso S, Bori G (2011) Subtrochanteric femoral fractures: a comparative study of the long proximal femoral nail and the long trochanteric fixation nail. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 21(7):511–516. doi: 10.1007/s00590-010-0741-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Imerci A, Canbek U, Karatosun V, Karapinar L, Yesil M (2015) Nailing or plating for subtrochanteric femoral fractures: a non-randomized comparative study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 25(5):889–894. doi: 10.1007/s00590-015-1629-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pu JS, Liu L, Wang GL, Fang Y, Yang TF (2009) Results of the proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) in elderly Chinese patients. Int Orthop 33(5):1441–1444. doi: 10.1007/s00264-009-0776-3 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baumgaertner MR, Curtin SL, Lindskog DM, Keggi JM (1995) The value of the tip-apex distance in predicting failure of fixation of peritrochanteric fractures of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 77(7):1058–1064PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bojan AJ, Beimel C, Taglang G, Collin D, Ekholm C, Jonsson A (2013) Critical factors in cut-out complication after gamma nail treatment of proximal femoral fractures. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 14(1):1. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-1 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Davis TR, Sher JL, Horsman A, Simpson M, Porter BB, Checketts RG (1990) Intertrochanteric femoral fractures. Mechanical failure after internal fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 72(1):26–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Domingo LJ, Cecilia D, Herrera A, Resines C (2001) Trochanteric fractures treated with a proximal femoral nail. Int Orthop 25(5):298–301CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vaughn J, Cohen E, Vopat BG, Kane P, Abbood E, Born C (2015) Complications of short versus long cephalomedullary nail for intertrochanteric femur fractures, minimum 1 year follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 25(4):665–670. doi: 10.1007/s00590-014-1557-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Frei HC, Hotz T, Cadosch D, Rudin M, Kach K (2012) Central head perforation, or “cut through,” caused by the helical blade of the proximal femoral nail antirotation. J Orthop Trauma 26(8):e102–e107. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e31822c53c1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Robinson SJ, Fountain JR, Torella F, Pennie BH (2011) Intrapelvic migration of a lag screw from a cephalomedullary femoral nail: a case report. Injury 42(11):1384–1386. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2011.01.019 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Park J, Yang KH (2010) Correction of malalignment in proximal femoral nailing—reduction technique of displaced proximal fragment. Injury 41(6):634–638. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.01.114 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tornetta P 3rd, Ritz G, Kantor A (1995) Femoral torsion after interlocked nailing of unstable femoral fractures. J Trauma 38(2):213–219CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Winquist RA, Hansen ST Jr, Clawson DK (1984) Closed intramedullary nailing of femoral fractures. A report of five hundred and twenty cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 66(4):529–539PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jin L, Zhang L, Hou Z, Chen W, Wang P, Zhang Y (2014) Cephalomedullary fixation for intertrochanteric fractures: an operative technical tip. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 24(7):1317–1320. doi: 10.1007/s00590-014-1430-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim JJ, Kim JW (2009) Subtrochanteric fracture: intramedullary nailing. J Korean Fract Soc 22(2):114–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tomas J, Teixidor J, Batalla L, Pacha D, Cortina J (2012) Subtrochanteric fractures: treatment with cerclage wire and long intramedullary nail. J Orthop Trauma. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e31826fc03f Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Afsari A, Liporace F, Lindvall E, Infante A Jr, Sagi HC, Haidukewych GJ (2010) Clamp-assisted reduction of high subtrochanteric fractures of the femur: surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92(Suppl 1 Pt 2):217–225. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.00158 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ji Wan Kim
    • 1
  • Derly O. Cuellar
    • 2
  • Jiandong Hao
    • 3
  • Benoit Herbert
    • 3
  • Cyril Mauffrey
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Haeundae Paik HospitalInje University, College of MedicineBusanRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedic SurgerySaint Louis University School of MedicineSt. LouisUSA
  3. 3.Department of Orthopaedics, Denver Health Medical CenterUniversity of Colorado, School of MedicineDenverUSA

Personalised recommendations