Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The treatment of transtrochanteric fractures of the femur with a minimally invasive technique using an extramedullary implant MINUS System

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We report here the results of a retrospective study on 120 patients treated for transtrochanteric fractures of the femur using a minimally invasive technique with an extramedullary sliding pin as implant – which we denoted the MINUS System. The evaluation was carried out in in the postoperative period, and the levels of haemoglobin (Hb) and haematocrit (Ht), surgical time, radiological screening time and pain levels were recorded. Prior to the operation, mean Hb and Ht were 11.69 g/dl and 35.72%, respectively; in the immediate postoperative period, they were 10.35 g/dl and 32.4%, respectively. Mean operating time was 39.35 min. Average postoperative pain was assessed at 4.44 (on a scale of 1 to 10). The average time for screening was 1.07 min. Based on these criteria, we conclude that the minimally invasive technique of the MINUS System allows for a shorter operating time and a minimal blood loss in the treatment of transtrochanteric fractures of the femur.

Résumé

120 patients ont été opérés d’une fracture transtrochantérienne du fémur par technique mini invasive en utilisant une ostéosynthèse par une vis plaque (MINUS Système). Ces patients ont été analysés de façon rétrospective. L’évaluation a été analysée en post opératoire en prenant en considération le taux d’hémoglobine et l’hématocrite, le temps opératoire, le temps de scopie et la douleur. En préopératoire, le taux moyen d’hémoglobine et d’hématocrite sont respectivement de 11,69 g avec un hématocrite à 35,72%, en post opératoire le taux d’hémoglobine était à 10,35 g et l’hématocrite à 32,4%. Le temps moyen de l’intervention a été de 39,35 minutes. La douleur moyenne en post opératoire a été cotée à 4,44. Le temps moyen d’exposition aux rayons par scopie a été de 1,07 minutes. En conclusion, la technique d’ostéosynthèse par voie mini invasive utilisant le système MINUS permet de raccourcir le temps opératoire et d’économiser les pertes sanguines dans le traitement des fractures transtrochantériennes du fémur.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Al-yassari G, Langstaff RJ, Jones JWM, Al-Lami M (2002) The AO/ASIF proximal femoral nail (PFN) for the treatment of unstable trochanteric femoral fracture. Injury 33:395–399

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Baumgaertner MR, Curtin SL, Lindskog DM (1998) Intramedullary versus extramedullary fixation for the treatment of intertrochanteric hip fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 348:87–94

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Baumgaertner MR, Curtin SL, Lindskog DM, Keggi J (1995) The value of the tip-apex distance in predicting failure of fixation of peritrochanteric fractures of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg 77-A(7):1058–1064

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bridle SH, Patel AD, Bircher M, Calvert PT (1991) Fixation of intertrochanteric fractures os the femur. A randomized prospective comparison os the gamma nail and the dinamic hip screw. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 73-B:330–334

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bridle S, Patel A, Bircher M, Calvert PT (1991) Fixation of intertrochanteric fractures of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 73:330–334

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cummings SR, Rubin SM, Black D (1990) The future of hip fractures in the United States: Numbers, costs, and potential effects of postmenopausal estrogen. Clin Ortop 252:163–166

    Google Scholar 

  7. Curtis MJ, Jinnah H, Wilson V, Cummingham BW (1994) Proximal femoral fractures: a biomechanical study to compare intramedullary and extramedulary fixation. Injury 25:99–104

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Goldman L, Lee T, Rudd P (1983) Ten commandments for effective consultations. Arch Inter Med 143:1753–1755

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Harrington P, Nihal A, Singhania AK, Howell FR (2002) Intramedullary hip screw versus slidind hip screw for unstable intertrochanteric femoral fractures in the elderly. Injury 33:23–28

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kaufer H (1980) Mechanics of the treatment of hip injures. Clin Orthop 146:53–61

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Koval KJ, Aharonoff GB, Rokito AS, Lyon T, Zuckerman JD (1996) Patients with femoral neck and intertrochanteric fractures: are they the same? Clin Orthop 330:166–172

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Koval KJ, Skovron ML, Aharonoff GB, Meadows SE, Zuckerman JD (1995) Ambulatory ability after hip fracture: a prospective study in geriatric patients. Clin Orthop 310:150–159

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lindskog DM, Baumgaertner MR (2004) Fraturas Intertrocantéricas Instáveis do Quadril em Idosos. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 12:179–190

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Medoff RJ, Maes K (1991) A new device for the fixation os unstable pertrochanteric fractures of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 73:1192–1199

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Park SR, Kang JS, Kim HS, Lee WH, Kim YH (1998) Treatment of intertrochanteric fracture with the Gamme AP locking nail or by a compression hip scew – a randomized prospective trial. Int Orthop 22:157–160

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Radford PJ, Needoff M, Webb JK (1993) A prospective randomized comparison of the dynamic hip screw and the gamma locking nail. Bone Joint Surg [Br] 75:789–793

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Rockwood CH Jr (1993) Fraturas em adultos. Manole, Brazil

  18. Ruedi TP, Murphy WM (2002) Placas em ponte, Princípios AO do Tratamento de Fratura, São Paulo. ArtMed Ed: 221–229

  19. Rush LV (1968) Dynamic intramedulary fracture fixation of the femur. Reflexion on the use of the round rod after 30 years. Clin Orthop 60:21–27

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Zain Elabdien BS, Olerud S, Karlstrom G (1984)The influence of age on the morphology of trochanteric fracture. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 103:156–161

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Samaritano Hospital, São Paulo, SP, Brazil

    Rogério Naim Sawaia

  2. Antonio Giglio Hospital, Osasco, SP, Brazil

    Rogério Naim Sawaia

  3. Unicamp University, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil

    William Dias Belangero

  4. Rua Capote Valente 154, ap 61, 05409-000, Osasco, SP, Brazil

    Rogério Naim Sawaia

Authors
  1. Rogério Naim Sawaia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William Dias Belangero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rogério Naim Sawaia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sawaia, R.N., Belangero, W.D. The treatment of transtrochanteric fractures of the femur with a minimally invasive technique using an extramedullary implant MINUS System. International Orthopaedics (SICO 32, 159–165 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-006-0304-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-006-0304-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation