Search In this Thesis
   Search In this Thesis  
العنوان
A comparison study of proximal femoral nail and dynamic hip screw devices in unstable trochanteric fractures /
المؤلف
Mostafa, Mohamed Ahmed Mohamed Ali.
هيئة الاعداد
باحث / محمد أحمد محمد علي مصطفى
مشرف / حسن حسين أحمد
مناقش / هاني عبد المنعم بسيوني
مناقش / السيد محمدي محمدي
الموضوع
Orthopedics. Orthopedic surgery.
تاريخ النشر
2019.
عدد الصفحات
127 p. :
اللغة
الإنجليزية
الدرجة
الدكتوراه
التخصص
جراحة العظام والطب الرياضي
تاريخ الإجازة
1/1/2019
مكان الإجازة
جامعة بنها - كلية طب بشري - جراحة العظام
الفهرس
Only 14 pages are availabe for public view

from 127

from 127

Abstract

Trochanteric fracture of the femur is a common orthopedic injury and is often associated with generalized physical deterioration. The goal of the treatment of these fractures is stable fixation, which allows early mobilization of the patient.Due to the bulky muscular attachment in pertrochanteric region, with no control over the proximal fragment, non- operative measures usually result in malunion. So the non-operative treatment should only be considered in non-ambulatory or chronic dementia patients with pain that is controllable with analgesics and rest, terminal diseases with less than 6 weeks of life expectancy, active infectious disease that itself is a contraindication for insertion of a surgical implant and incomplete pertrochanteric fractures diagnosed by MRI.The conservative management has high complication rate such as decubitus ulcers, U.T.I, joint contractures, pneumonia, and thromboembolism contribute to the high mortality rate. The increased incidence of varus deformity and shortening results in poor function.Surgical treatment has become the treatment of choice to prevent these complications and several implant designs have been developed for that. Implants can be divided into two groups: extramedullary and intramedullary fixation devices.Dynamic hip screw (DHS) has been the standard implant in treating trochanteric fractures. However, when compared with the intramedullary implants, it has a biomechanical disadvantage because of a wider distance between the weight bearing axis and the implants.