Comparison of extramedullary and intramedullary devices for treatment of subtrochanteric femoral fractures at tertiary level center

Abstract

Objective: The treatment of subtrochanteric fractures is challenging and treatment modalities and implants are constantly evolving. This study attempts to revisit and compare extramedullary vs. intramedullary devices in relatively young population. Methods: Thirty patients with subtrochanteric fractures were enrolled and treated with extramedullary or intramedullary devices and follow-up continued one year for clinico-radiological assessment. Results: The mean age of patients was 37.53 years. Most were males between 21-40 years old. The dominant mode of injury was traffic accidents (66%). Fractures were classifi ed according to Russell-Taylor classifi cation. Forty percent were Russell-Taylor type IA, 37% type IB and 23% type IIA. Average time to surgery was 3.6 days from the time of admission to hospital. Mean duration of surgery was 45 minutes for intramedullary device (group A) and 105 minutes for extramedullary device (group B). Average blood loss was 100 ml in group A and 200 ml in group B. Mean duration of radiation exposure was 130 seconds and 140 seconds for groups A and B, while average duration of hospital stay was 12 days and 16 days respectively. Excellent results were seen in 47% of cases in group A and 33% of cases in group B. Conclusion: Intramedullary device is a reliable implant for subtrochanteric fractures. It has high rates of union with minimal soft-tissue damage. Intramedullary fixation has biological and biomechanical advantages, but surgery is technically demanding. Gradual learning and patience is needed to make this method truly rewarding. Key words: Subtrochanteric fractures; Intramedullary; Dynamic hip screw