Search

Abstract Background Implant choice for the fixation of femoral neck fracture is one of the most important management controversies. This study aims to evaluate and compare the short-term outcomes associated with the use of the Femoral Neck System (FNS), Multiple Cancellous Screws (MCS), and Dynamic Hip Screws (DHS) in treating femoral neck fractures in a young patient population. Methods From June 2018 to June 2021, a total of 120 surgeries for a primary femoral neck fracture were retrospectively analyzed. This review encompassed demographic details of the patients and the mechanisms behind the injuries. Key surgical parameters such as operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, fluoroscopy duration, and hospital stay were meticulously documented. The employed surgical technique was described. All patients were followed up at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively. Avascular necrosis of the femoral head (AVN), nonunion, malreduction, implant failure or other complications were noted. The functional status at the last follow-up was assessed using the Harris functional scoring criteria. Results There were 90 males and 30 females, with a mean age of 40.4 years. As to patient characteristics, there were no significant differences between the three groups. DHS group showed longer operation time(52.15 ± 4.80 min), more blood loss(59.05 ± 5.87 ml) and longer time of hospitalization(7.6 ± 0.90 d) than FNS group (39.65 ± 2.84 min, 45.33 ± 9.63 ml and 4.87 ± 0.48 d) and MCS group (39.45 ± 3.10 min, 48.15 ± 7.88 ml and 5.04 ± 0.49 d) (p

Abstract Background The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the use of three-dimensional (3D) printing models for preoperative planning in cases of complex fracture. Methods In total, 48 patients with AO type C fractures of the distal radius were enrolled in the study between January 2014 and January 2015. They were divided randomly into 3D model (n = 23) and routine treatment (n = 25) groups. A 3D digital model of each distal radius fracture in the former group was constructed. The model was exported to a 3D printer for construction of a full solid model. During each operation, the operative time, amount of blood loss, and frequency of intraoperative fluoroscopy were recorded, which were regarded as primary outcome measures. Patients were followed to evaluate surgical outcomes by Gartland–Werley scores, radiological evaluation, and range of motion of wrist, and these were regarded as the secondary outcome measures. In addition, we invited surgeons and patients to complete questionnaires. Results The treatment of complex fractures using the 3D printing approach reduced the frequency of intraoperative fluoroscopy, blood loss volume, and operative time, but did not improve postoperative function compared with routine treatment. The patients wanted the doctor to use the 3D model to describe the condition and introduce the operative plan because it facilitated their understanding. The orthopaedic surgeons thought that the 3D model was useful for communication with patients, but were much less satisfied with its use in preoperative planning. Conclusion Our study revealed that 3D printing models effectively help the doctors plan and perform the operation and provide more effective communication between doctors and patients, but can not improve postoperative function compared with routine treatment. Trial Registration This trial was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry on May 9, 2017 (ChiCTR-IRP-17011343, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=19264).