Scholarlink

Background <p>Internal fixation is performed in elderly femoral neck fracture (FN) patients. Historically, fixation using multiple cannulated cancellous screws (CCS) has yielded stable outcomes. A new instrument, the femoral neck system (FNS), which consists of a neck bolt, an anti-rotation screw, a plate, and a locking screw, has been introduced to stabilize the fracture site. This study aimed to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of internal fixation of FN with CCS or FNSs in a retrospective multicenter study.</p> Subject and methods <p>This multicenter, retrospective study was conducted at 12 centers from 2016 to 2020. A total of 939 patients were treated by internal fixation for FN. A total of 523 patients remained after excluding cases with missing data, insufficient follow-up, or treatment using implants other than CCS or FNS. These subjects were divided into two groups: those treated with CCS (group C) or those treated with FNS (group F). We matched the patients by age, sex, and fracture type. The walking ability and numerical rating scale (NRS) scores of the two groups were compared as functional assessments. Complications included reoperation, osteonecrosis, pseudarthrosis, and cut-out. Operative time and blood loss were evaluated as operative details.</p> Results <p>After matching, 99 patients each from groups C and F were selected. All results are shown as group C versus group F. The operative time in group F was shorter than that in group C (44.33 min vs. 30.59 min, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). There was no difference in blood loss (19.05 ml vs. 17.77 ml, <i>P</i> = 0.716). The numbers of patients with reoperation or complications did not differ to a statistically significant extent (n = 4 vs. n = 0, <i>P</i> = 0.121). There was no difference in walking ability at the last observation (<i>P</i> = 0.055). The femoral neck shortening in group F was larger than that in group C (5.60 mm vs. 7.08 mm, <i>P</i> = 0.03). The NRS at the last observation did not differ to a statistically significant extent (1.60 vs. 1.71, <i>P</i> = 0.644).</p> Conclusion <p>FNS is an effective treatment because it is technically easy to perform, the operative time is significantly shorter, and the results are comparable to those of conventional CCS.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Clinical and radiographic outcomes of multiple cannulated cancellous screw fixation versus the femoral neck system for femoral neck fractures in the elderly: a multicenter retrospective comparative study

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月15日

查看全文
  • Eiki Morisaki,
  • Hiroaki Ido,
  • Katsuhiro Tokutake,
  • Hiroaki Nakashima,
  • Kenichi Mishima,
  • Shiro Imagama,
  • Yasuhiko Takegami

摘要

Background

Internal fixation is performed in elderly femoral neck fracture (FN) patients. Historically, fixation using multiple cannulated cancellous screws (CCS) has yielded stable outcomes. A new instrument, the femoral neck system (FNS), which consists of a neck bolt, an anti-rotation screw, a plate, and a locking screw, has been introduced to stabilize the fracture site. This study aimed to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of internal fixation of FN with CCS or FNSs in a retrospective multicenter study.

Subject and methods

This multicenter, retrospective study was conducted at 12 centers from 2016 to 2020. A total of 939 patients were treated by internal fixation for FN. A total of 523 patients remained after excluding cases with missing data, insufficient follow-up, or treatment using implants other than CCS or FNS. These subjects were divided into two groups: those treated with CCS (group C) or those treated with FNS (group F). We matched the patients by age, sex, and fracture type. The walking ability and numerical rating scale (NRS) scores of the two groups were compared as functional assessments. Complications included reoperation, osteonecrosis, pseudarthrosis, and cut-out. Operative time and blood loss were evaluated as operative details.

Results

After matching, 99 patients each from groups C and F were selected. All results are shown as group C versus group F. The operative time in group F was shorter than that in group C (44.33 min vs. 30.59 min, P < 0.001). There was no difference in blood loss (19.05 ml vs. 17.77 ml, P = 0.716). The numbers of patients with reoperation or complications did not differ to a statistically significant extent (n = 4 vs. n = 0, P = 0.121). There was no difference in walking ability at the last observation (P = 0.055). The femoral neck shortening in group F was larger than that in group C (5.60 mm vs. 7.08 mm, P = 0.03). The NRS at the last observation did not differ to a statistically significant extent (1.60 vs. 1.71, P = 0.644).

Conclusion

FNS is an effective treatment because it is technically easy to perform, the operative time is significantly shorter, and the results are comparable to those of conventional CCS.