COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of the modified Heuter approach and the Kocher-Langenbeck approach in the treatment of Pipkin type I and type II femoral head fractures.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of the modified Heuter approach and the Kocher-Langenbeck approach in the treatment of Pipkin type I and II femoral head fractures.

METHODS: The study cohort consisted of 39 patients with Pipkin type I or type II femoral head fractures who were treated by open reduction and internal fixation through the modified Heuter approach (the Heuter group) or the Kocher-Langenbeck approach (the K-L group) between June 2013 and January 2016. Standard radiographs and computed tomography (CT) scans were obtained before surgery and during the follow-up. The two approaches were compared in reference to operative time, amount of blood loss, the occurrence of complications, and final functional outcome. The Brooker classification was used to document heterotopic ossification and the Thompson-Epstein scores were used for final evaluation.

RESULTS: The mean operative time and estimated blood loss in the Heuter group were lower than those in the K-L group (P < 0.001 for both measures). The incisions healed primarily in all patients after surgery, no infection or deep venous thromboses were detected in either group, post-operative imaging data showed that dislocation and fractures were reduced, and the fractures finally achieved bony union. There were no significant differences in the incidence of complications or final functional outcomes between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the Kocher-Langenbeck approach, the modified Heuter approach can effectively reduce the blood loss and operative time without increasing the risk of complications; this approach is simple, straightforward, and atraumatic and may be a viable option for open reduction and internal fixation of Pipkin type I and type II femoral head fractures.

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.

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