Journal of Musculoskeletal Trauma

Original Article

Results of Intramedullary Nailing of Femoral Shaft Fracture: Trochanteric Entry Portal (Sirus Nail) versus Piriformis Entry Portal (M/DN Nail): Sang Ho Ha, Woong Hee Kim, Gwang Chul Lee; J Korean Fract Soc 2014;27(1):50-57. Published online January 31, 2014; DOI: https://doi.org/10.12671/jkfs.2014.27.1.50

PURPOSE
To compare treatment results obtained using the trochanteric (Sirus nail) entry portal with those obtained using the Piriformis fossa (M/DN) entry portal during intramedullary (IM) nailing of femur shaft fractures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Four hundreds and thirty-two patients treated for femur shaft fracture using IM nails from February, 2001 to May, 2010 were divided into two groups. group 1 was composed of 180 patients treated through the trochanteric (Sirus nail; n=180) entry portal, while group 2 contained 170 patients treated through the piriformis fossa (M/DN nail; n=170) entry portal. We compared the clinical and radiographic findings of both groups to evaluate the treatment results.
RESULTS
Functional result, range of motion and union time (18, 20 weeks) were similar in both groups. The operation time of patients in the over-weighted group was 90 minutes in group 1 and 120 minutes in group 2 (p<0.05). Additionally, the blood loss was 280 ml in group 1 and 335 ml in group 2, and in case of over-weight patients, group 2 showed more blood loss (p<0.05). The duration of exposure to fluoroscopy differed slightly, with group 1 being less exposed than group 2; however, this difference was not significant (p>0.05). There were 18 iatrogenic fractures in group 1 and 4 in group 2 (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION
There was not much difference in complications based on clinical and radiographic findings of both groups. For groups using the trochanteric entry portal, the operation time was shorter and blood loss was lower than in groups using the piriformis entry portal. Iatrogenic fracture occurred more often in the group using the trochanteric entry portal than in the group using the piriformis entry portal.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Analysis of different entry portals for femoral nail with two different nail designs-straight nail versus lateral angulated nail - Does it make a difference?
Sanjay Yadav, Saurabh Singh, Anil Kumar Rai
Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma.2019; 10(5): 912. CrossRef
Comparing Entry Points for Antegrade Nailing of Femoral Shaft Fractures
Ujash Sheth, Chetan Gohal, Jaskarndip Chahal, Aaron Nauth, Tim Dwyer
Orthopedics.2016;[Epub] CrossRef
The Curative Effect Comparison Between Prolonged Third Generation of Gamma Nail and Prolonged Dynamic Hip Screw Internal Fixation in Treating Femoral Intertrochanteric Fracture and the Effect on Infection
Wenye He, Wei Zhang
Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics.2015; 71(2): 695. CrossRef
Treatment of Femur Subtrochanteric Fracture Using the Intramedullary Long Nail; Comparison of Closed Reduction and Minimal Open Reduction
Sang Joon Lee, Sang Hong Lee, Sang Soo Park, Hyung Seok Park
Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association.2015; 50(1): 18. CrossRef
Failure to Remove a Trochanteric Entry Femoral Nail and Its Cause in Adolescent Patients: Two Cases Report
Ji-Hwan Kim, Seung-Oh Nam, Young-Soo Byun, Han-Sang Kim
Journal of the Korean Fracture Society.2015; 28(1): 71. CrossRef
Treatment of the Femoral Fracture Using Sirus® Nail: A Comparison of Complication according to the Entry Potal
Young-Yool Chung, Dong-Hyuk Choi, Dae-Hyun Yoon, Jung-Ho Lee, Ji-Hun Park
Journal of the Korean Fracture Society.2015; 28(2): 103. CrossRef
Comparison of Greater Trochanter Versus Piriformis Entry Nail for Treatment of Femur Shaft Fracture
Jong-Hee Lee, Jong-Hoon Park, Si-Yeong Park, Seong-Cheol Park, Seung-Beom Han
Journal of the Korean Fracture Society.2014; 27(4): 287. CrossRef

186 View
1 Download
7 Crossref

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search