Abstract

IntroductionFemoral neck fractures have posed a significant global healthcare challenge and had notable impacts on the quality of life. Current treatment strategies for femoral neck fractures in young individuals have varied, emphasizing the need for optimal fixation methods. This study compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of the dynamic compression system (DCS) and multiple cancellous screws (MCS) methods.MethodsThis retrospective study included a total of 275 young adults with fresh femoral neck fractures treated with DCS and MCS. A matching analysis with a 1:1 ratio based on age, gender, fracture classification, and reduction quality was conducted. Demographic data were recorded, and comparisons were made according to follow-up time (FUT), hospitalization period, operation duration, femoral neck shortening, caput-collum-diaphysis (CCD) angle, Harris Hip Score (HHS), and post-operative complications.ResultsA total of 42 fractures were matched with a median age of 42 years (range, 22–48). In the DCS group, vertical neck shortening (median 1.92) was significantly lower than that in the MCS group (median 4.53) (P < 0.05). In the DCS group, horizontal femoral neck shortening, resultant femoral neck shortening, the amount of change in CCD angle, and HHS were 0.57 mm (0.43, 4.74 mm), 1.82 mm (0.40, 3.53 mm), 0.13° (-0.78°, 1.80°), and 91 (85–93), respectively. They were all non-significant than 1.00 mm (0.56, 6.23 mm), 2.74 mm (1.59, 6.71 mm), -0.18° (-1.11°,1.85°), and 91 (75, 93) in the MCS group, respectively (P > 0.05). There was no statistical difference in FUT, hospitalization period, operation time, and post-operative complications at the latest follow-up (P > 0.05). There were no complications such as pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and incision infection reported.ConclusionDCS and MCS demonstrated effectiveness in treating femoral neck fractures in young adults. The DCS implant provides additional stability in the vertical axis. A prospective randomized controlled study with a large sample size was needed to validate these findings.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.