Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparative analysis of treatment of basicervical femur fractures in young adults with CCS, DHS, and PFN.

Objective: To the best of the authors' knowledge, no studies in the literature have compared the clinical outcome of the three most common implants used to treat basicervical fractures of the femoral neck in young adults, i.e. CCS, DHS, and PFN. The present study attempts to fill the void in the literature and reach a conclusion regarding the usefulness of these implants in these fractures.

Methods: This was a prospective interventional study including 90 patients with basicervical fracture of the neck of femur treated randomly with cancellous cannulated lag screws or dynamic hip screw, with a derotation screw or short PFN.

Results: Mean time for fracture union was 14.4, 13.9, and 13.5 weeks and union rate was 93.2%, 100%, and 100% in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The mean Harris Hip Score at the final follow up was similar among all the groups, i.e. 79.4, 82.2, and 81.9 in CCS, DHS, and PFN groups, respectively. The highest proportion of good to excellent results was noted in the DHS group, i.e. 83.3%, whereas it was 73.6% and 80% in the CCS and PFN groups, respectively.

Conclusion: Multiple cancellous screws do not provide a sufficiently stable construct during fracture healing. PFN, although associated with lesser implant failures than CCS, have a higher incidence of technical errors. DHS provides sufficient stability in well-reduced basicervical fractures in young adults; it is associated with highest fracture union rates and best functional outcome out of the three implants at final follow-up.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app