Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prevention of cement leakage into the hip joint by a standard cement plug during PFN-A cement augmentation: a technical note

  • Orthopaedic Surgery
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Medial penetration of the helical blade into the hip joint after fixation of trochanteric fractures using the proximal femur nail antirotation (PFN-A) is a potential failure mode. In low demand patients a blade exchange with cement augmentation may be an option if conversion to total hip arthroplasty is unfeasible to salvage the cut-through. This article describes a technique to avoid intraarticular cement leakage using a cement plug to close the defect in the femoral head caused by the cut-through.

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

References

  1. Kammerlander C, Doshi H, Gebhard F, Scola A, Meier C, Linhart W, Garcia-Alonso M, Nistal J, Blauth M (2014) Long-term results of the augmented PFNA: a prospective multicenter trial. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 134:343–349

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Liu Y, Tao R, Liu F, Wang Y, Zhou Z, Cao Y, Wang H (2010) Mid-term outcomes after intramedullary fixation of peritrochanteric femoral fractures using the new proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA). Injury 41:810–817

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mereddy P, Kamath S, Ramakrishnan M, Malik H, Donnachie N (2009) The AO/ASIF proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA): a new design for the treatment of unstable proximal femoral fractures. Injury 40:428–432

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Simmermacher RK, Ljungqvist J, Bail H, Hockertz T, Vochteloo AJ, Ochs U, Werken C (2008) The new proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) in daily practice: results of a multicentre clinical study. Injury 39:932–939

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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:e102–e107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Brunner A, Buttler M, Lehmann U, Frei HC, Kratter R, Di LM, Scola A, Sermon A, Attal R (2015) What is the optimal salvage procedure for cut-out after surgical fixation of trochanteric fractures with the PFNA or TFN?: a multicentre study. Injury 47(2):432–438

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nikoloski AN, Osbrough AL, Yates PJ (2013) Should the tip-apex distance (TAD) rule be modified for the proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA)? A retrospective study. J Orthop Surg Res 8:35

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Gavaskar AS, Subramanian M, Tummala NC (2012) Results of proximal femur nail antirotation for low velocity trochanteric fractures in elderly. Indian J Orthop 46:556–560

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Gardner MJ, Briggs SM, Kopjar B, Helfet DL, Lorich DG (2007) Radiographic outcomes of intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with the trochanteric fixation nail. Injury 38:1189–1196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Born CT, Karich B, Bauer C, von Oldenburg G, Augat P (2011) Hip screw migration testing: first results for hip screws and helical blades utilizing a new oscillating test method. J Orthop Res 29:760–766

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 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 77:1058–1064

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Brunner A, Jockel JA, Babst R (2008) The PFNA proximal femur nail in treatment of unstable proximal femur fractures-3 cases of postoperative perforation of the helical blade into the hip joint. J Orthop Trauma 22:731–736

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jores L (1913) Über eine verbesserte Methode der Konservierung anatomischer Präparate. Münch med Wschr 60:976

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hwang JH, Garg AK, Oh JK, Oh CW, Lee SJ, Myung-Rae C, Kim MK, Kim H (2012) A biomechanical evaluation of proximal femoral nail antirotation with respect to helical blade position in femoral head: a cadaveric study. Indian J Orthop 46:627–632

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Erhart S, Schmoelz W, Blauth M, Lenich A (2011) Biomechanical effect of bone cement augmentation on rotational stability and pull-out strength of the Proximal Femur Nail Antirotation. Injury 42:1322–1327

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Scola A, Gebhard F, Dehner C, Roderer G (2014) The PFNA(R) Augmented in Revision Surgery of Proximal Femur Fractures. Open Orthop J 8:232–236

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Erhart S, Kammerlander C, El-Attal R, Schmoelz W (2012) Is augmentation a possible salvage procedure after lateral migration of the proximal femur nail antirotation? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 132:1577–1581

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fichman SG, Makinen TJ, Safir O, Vincent A, Lozano B, Kashigar A, Kuzyk PR (2016) Arthroplasty for unstable pertrochanteric hip fractures may offer a lower re-operation rate as compared to cephalomedullary nailing. Int Orthop 40:15–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Studer P, Suhm N, Wang Q, Rosenthal R, Saleh HA, Jakob M (2015) Displaced trochanteric fragments lead to poor functional outcome in pertrochanteric fractures treated by cephalomedullary nails. Injury 46:2384–2388

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Paul Rodham, Newcastle, UK for his linguistic help in the preparation of this manuscript. We thank Nane Boemke, Head Preparator, Institute of Anatomy, University of Bern for her technical assistance. We thank Martin Stähli, Zimmer GmbH, for providing the medullary cement plug and Hans Gerber, DePuy Synthes, Johnson & Johnson AG, for allocating the PFN-A set.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, University of Bern, Inselspital, Freiburgstrasse 3, 3010, Bern, Switzerland

    M. Hanke, M. Tannast, M. J. Keel & J. D. Bastian

  2. Institute of Anatomy, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

    V. Djonov

Authors
  1. M. Hanke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. V. Djonov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Tannast
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. J. Keel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. D. Bastian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. D. Bastian.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hanke, M., Djonov, V., Tannast, M. et al. Prevention of cement leakage into the hip joint by a standard cement plug during PFN-A cement augmentation: a technical note. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136, 747–750 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-016-2447-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-016-2447-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation