{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012549019607843137, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00784313725490196, 'mean_word_length': 5.577319587628866, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Early Complications in Proximal Femoral Nailing Done for Treatment of Subtrochanteric Fractures

ABSTRACT



AIM
To analyse the early complications following the use of PFN in subtrochanteric fractures.


BACKGROUND
Osteosynthesis with PFN in subtrochanteric fracture features the advantages of high rotational stability of the head-neck fragment, an unreamed implantation technique and the possibility of static or dynamic distal locking. However, the use of the nail requires technical expertise and is accompanied by some risks of error which can lead to osteosynthesis failure.


METHODS
Between May 2009 and May 2011, 50 consecutive patients with PFN fixations for subtrochanteric fractures were observed for intraoperative and postoperative complications.


RESULTS
We identified intraoperative technical difficulties in four patients and six patients showed postoperative complications.


CONCLUSION
When subtrochanteric fractures are to be stabilised with a PFN, the precise and expert technical performance of implantation is the basic surgical requirement. Good reduction with minimal dissection and the use of an appropriate implant is necessary to avoid treatment failure.


KEY WORDS
Subtrochanteric fractures, trochanteric fractures, proximal femoral nail, PFN.