Ipsilateral Femoral Neck Fractures Research Articles

MRI characteristics of radiographically occult femoral neck fractures in trauma patients with ipsilateral femoral shaft fractures.

Ipsilateral femoral neck fractures can be seen alongside femoral shaft fractures in high-velocity trauma patients. These neck fractures are often occult on radiographs and CT, and can have a significant impact on patient outcomes if not treated promptly. Limited protocol pelvic MRI has been used to increase sensitivity for these occult fractures. Detailed characterization of these fractures on MRI is lacking. 427 consecutive trauma patients presenting to our emergency department who had known femoral diaphyseal fractures but no ipsilateral femoral neck fracture on radiographs or CT were included in this study. These patients were scanned using a limited protocol MRI with coronal T1 and coronal STIR sequences. Presence of an ipsilateral femoral neck fracture and imaging characteristics of the fracture were obtained. 31 radiographically occult ipsilateral femoral neck fractures were found, representing 7% of all cases. All neck fractures were incomplete. All fractures originated along the lateral cortex of the femoral neck and extended medially towards the junction of the medial femoral neck and the lesser trochanter. 58% (18/31) were vertical in orientation. 61% (19/31) did not demonstrate any appreciate edema on STIR images. Implementation of limited protocol MRI protocol increases sensitivity for detection of femoral neck fractures in the setting of ipsilateral femoral shaft fractures not seen on radiograph or CT imaging. We describe the characteristic MR imaging features of these fractures.

ARTICULAR FEMORAL HEAD FRACTURE MANAGEMENT: A COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Background: Femoral head fractures (FHFs) are relatively rare injuries usually caused by high-energy trauma. They typically occur after a posterior dislocation, and approximately 5 to 15 of posterior hip dislocations involve FHFs. FHFs may also occur simultaneously with acetabular fractures, with an estimated incidence of 29.2 In addition, the incidence of ipsilateral femoral head and neck fractures (iFHNF) is low. However, iFHNFs, as a special type of fracture, have the worst prognosis among all FHFs The aim: The aim of this study to show about articular femoral head fracture management. Methods: By comparing itself to the standards set by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020, this study was able to show that it met all of the requirements. So, the experts were able to make sure that the study was as up-to-date as it was possible to be. For this search approach, publications that came out between 2014 and 2024 were taken into account. Several different online reference sources, like Pubmed and SagePub, were used to do this. It was decided not to take into account review pieces, works that had already been published, or works that were only half done. Result: In the PubMed database, the results of our search get 17 articles, whereas the results of our search on SagePub get 489 articles, on Google Scholar 8050 articles. Records remove before screening are 5860, so we get 2696 articles fos screening. After we screened based on record exclude, we compiled a total of 12 papers. We included five research that met the criteria. Conclusion: Open reduction and internal fixation of femoral head fracture using surgical hip dislocation through Ganz approach is a viable treatment option and provides satisfactory results with low complication rates.

Characteristics of Femoral Shaft Fractures That Predict Ipsilateral Femoral Neck Fractures.

This study aims to characterize radiographic features and fracture characteristics in femoral shaft fractures with associated femoral neck fractures, with the goal of establishing predictive indicators for the presence of ipsilateral femoral neck fractures (IFNFs). A retrospective cohort was collected from the electronic medical record of three level I trauma centers over a 5-year period (2017 to 2022) by current procedural terminology (CPT) codes. Current CPT codes for combined femoral shaft and IFNFs were identified to generate our study group. CPT codes for isolated femur fractures were identified to generate a control group. One hundred forty patients comprised our IFNF cohort, and 280 comprised the control cohort. On univariate, there were significant differences in mechanism of injury (P < 0.001), Orthopedic Trauma Association (OTA)/Arbeitsgemeinshaft fur Osteosynthesefragen (AO) classification (P = 0.002), and fracture location (P < 0.001) between cohorts. On multivariate, motor vehicle crashes were more commonly associated with IFNFs compared with other mechanism of injuries. OTA/AO 32A fractures were more commonly associated with IFNFs when compared with OTA/AO 32B fractures (adjusted odds ratio = 0.36, P < 0.001). Fractures through the isthmus were significantly more commonly associated with IFNFs than fractures more proximal (adjusted odds ratio = 2.52, P = 0.011). Detecting IFNFs in femoral shaft fractures is challenging. Motor vehicle crashes and motorcycle collisions, OTA/AO type 32A fractures, and isthmus fractures are predictive of IFNFs.

Management of ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fracture using reconstruction nail: A case report

Abstract Ipsilateral fractures of femoral shaft and neck of femur fracture are rare but challenging and typically caused by high energy trauma. Review of literature shows various options for implants and surgical techniques for the treatment of Ipsilateral femoral neck shaft fractures but still none of them can be considered as standard, or even preferable. This is a case of 25 year old male who had suffered injury to his left hip and left thigh following an RTA. Radiographs of pelvis and thigh showed fracture of neck of right femur [basicervial] with fracture of shaft of right femur [junction of proximal 2/3rd and distal 1/3rd]. He was managed using reconstruction nail for both fractures 3 days after injury. The patient has attained bony union of both fractures in 8 months and was able to carry out his all routine activities and has attained good functional range of motion at hip and knee joint. We concluded that reconstruction nail is an acceptable implant for the management of ipsilateral neck and shaft of femur fracture with good radiological and clinical outcomes.

FREQUENCY OF IPSILATERAL FEMORAL NECK FRACTURES IN PATIENTS WITH FEMORAL SHAFT FRACTURES

Young people are regularly injured and get femoral shaft fractures. Comprehensive data is needed to determine the frequency of ipsilateral femoral neck fractures in people with femoral shaft fractures. In the present study, individuals with femoral shaft fractures will be examined to determine the frequency of ipsilateral femoral neck fractures. A retrospective study was conducted at the Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Combined Military Hospital (CMH) Rawalpindi, from January 2023 to August 2023. There were 160 participants in the research who had femoral shaft fractures. Preoperative radiographs and intraoperative results were examined to determine if the patients had ipsilateral femoral neck fractures. This retrospective study covered 160 femoral shaft fracture patients with averaged 35 years old, with 75% being male and 25% female. Road traffic accidents (62.5%), falls from height (25%) and sports injuries (3.75%) caused the greatest injuries. 8(5%) had ipsilateral femoral neck fractures. Patients with ipsilateral femoral neck fractures were 35 years old and were 75% male. 87.5% of patients had good surgical results, 6.3% fair, and 6.3% poor. The most frequent consequences were non-union (3.1%), malunion (1.3%), and infection (1.9%). This study identified 5% of ipsilateral femoral neck fractures in femoral shaft fracture patients. These patients must be carefully evaluated and managed to minimize missing or delayed identification of concomitant femoral neck fractures. There were 5% ipsilateral femoral neck fractures in femoral shaft fracture patients. These patients must be carefully evaluated and managed to minimize missing or delayed identification of concomitant femoral neck fractures. Early detection and treatment of these fractures may improve results and avoid complications.

Comparison of reconstruction nails versus dual implants in the treatment of ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures in adults: a meta-analysis and systematic review

ObjectiveThere is no consensus on the optimal treatment for ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures. This meta-analysis aims to assess the effectiveness of reconstruction nails and dual implants in treating ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures to provide a basis for decision-making when selecting the optimal approach.MethodsRelevant articles were retrieved from Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases using the keywords "neck of femur", "shaft" and "fracture fixation" from inception until November 17, 2022. The screening process of the studies was conducted independently by two assessors, who assessed each study's eligibility and two assessors assessed the quality. Then compared differences in outcome measures using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of ten retrospective cohort studies were included. There were no significant differences in union time, union rate, union-related complications (malunion, nonunion, delayed union) of femoral neck and shaft fractures, osteonecrosis of the femoral head, and functional outcomes (Friedman-Wyman scoring system) (P > 0.05).ConclusionOur pooled estimates indicated that reconstruction nails and dual implants for ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures could yield satisfactory surgical results, and that there is no difference between the two treatment methods.Trial registrationThis meta-analysis was registered on the PROSPERO website (registration number: CRD42022379606).

Surgical fixation of ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures: a matter of debate?

Segmental femoral fractures represent a rare but complex clinical challenge. They mostly result from high-energy mechanisms, dictate a careful initial assessment and are managed with various techniques. These often include an initial phase of damage control orthopaedics while the initial manoeuvres of patient and soft tissue resuscitation are employed. Definitive fixation consists of either single-implant (reconstruction femoral nails) or dual-implant constructs. There is no consensus in favour of one of these two strategies. At present, there is no high-quality comparative evidence between the various methods of treatment. The development of advanced design nailing and plating systems has offered fixation constructs with improved characteristics. A comprehensive review of the existing evidence with a step-by-step description of these different definitive fixation strategies based on three case examples was conducted. Furthermore, the rationale for using single vs dual-implant strategy in its case is presented with supportive references. The prevention of complications relies mainly on the strict adherence to basic principles of fracture fixation with an emphasis on careful preoperative planning, the quality of the reduction, and the application of soft tissue-friendly surgical methods.

Surgical treatment for ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fracture

To retrospectively analyze efficacy of single structure internal fixation and double structure internal fixation in the treatment of ipsilateral femoral shaft and neck fracture, and analyze their indications. From June 2015 to December 2020, 21 patients with ipsilateral femoral shaft and femoral neck fracture were treated, including 14 males and 7 females, aged 23 to 69 years old with an average of(38.1±12.9) years old. According to different femoral shaft fracture sites, some patients were fixed with cephalomedullary implant for both femoral neck and the femoral shaft(single structure, InterTan or PFNA Ⅱ), some patients were fixed with cannulated screws for the femoral neck and a retrograde locking nail for the femoral shaft (dual structure), and postoperative function and complications were recorded during follow-up. In 10 cases of single-structure fixation, the femoral necks were all basicervical fractures, and the femoral shaft fractures were located in the proximal isthmus;11 cases were double-structure fixation, 9 cases in 11 were basal type of femoral neck, 2 cases in 11 were neck type, and the femoral shaft fractures were located in the isthmus and the distal isthmus. All patients were followed up for 12 to 27 months. No femoral head necrosis, deformity, delay or nonunion occurred in the patients with single-structure fixation, and no delayed union or nonunion occurred in femoral shaft fractures;At the final follow-up, Harris score of patients with single-structure fixation was 91.8±4.1, with 8 cases were excellent and 2 cases were good. The fractures of patients with dual-structure fixation achieved good union without femoral head necrosis, except 1 case of femoral shaft fracture had delayed union;At the final follow-up, Harris score of patients with dual-structure fixation was 92.4±5.9, 7 cases were excellent, 3 cases were good, and 1 case was fair. Good reduction and fixation is the key to the treatment of such fractures. Both the single-structure fixation and the dual-structure fixation are good methods, and it should be selected according to the locations of femoral shaft and femoral neck fractures. Single-structure fixation is a good choice for femoral shaft fractures located at the proximal isthmus and basal femoral neck fractures. For isthmus and distal femoral shaft fractures combined with ipsilateral femoral neck fractures, dual-structure fixation is recommended.

Disastrous triad of femoral head:femoral neck fracture meeting fracture-dislocation of femoral head

Femoral head and ipsilateral femoral neck fractures are serious and complicated injuries, which usually yield unsatisfactory results using conventional hip-preserving surgery. The key point of the management and prognosis mainly lies in femoral neck fractures. An apparent and consecutive relationship exists between femoral neck fractures and femoral head fracture-hip dislocation in such injuries. It is believed that disastrous triad of femoral head (DTFH) could summarize these specific injuries, and reflect the injury mechanism and prognostic characteristics. Based on our clinical observation and literature review, DTFH could be divided into three subgroups:TypeⅠ, common DTFH, in which femoral neck fractures occur following femoral head fractures-hip dislocation due to the same trauma; TypeⅡ, iatrogenic DTFH, in which femoral neck fractures come out in the caring process of femoral head fractures-hip dislocation; Type Ⅲ, stressed DTFH, in which femoral neck fractures occur after the management of femoral head fractures-hip dislocation. In the scenario, the line of femoral neck fractures locates distally to the femoral head fractures. Herein, we will discuss clinical characteristics of these types of DTFH.

Ipsilateral Femoral Neck and Shaft Fracture; A Case Series of 5 Patients

Femoral shaft fractures are very common following trauma in adults and sometimes the patient may have an ipsilateral neck of femur fractures too. Unfortunately, the neck of femur fractures may be missed. The challenge lies in detecting and properly managing the neck of femur fracture in the presence of a femoral shaft fracture. We share our experience in treating 5 patients with ipsilateral neck and shaft of femur fractures and discuss the learning points in regards to diagnosis and treatment of this condition.International Journal of Human and Health Sciences Vol. 07 No. 02 April’23 Page: 188-194

Stress fracture of ipsilateral femoral neck after total knee replacement: 2 cases report

The main complications after total knee replacement were pain, infection, thrombosis and nerve injury, but few patients had ipsilateral femoral neck fractures, which might be related to changes of the biomechanical axis of the knee joint, increasing activity level, osteoporosis, and high BMI, following TKR.

Conversion hip arthroplasty for failed internal fixation of ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures: a case report

BackgroundIpsilateral femoral neck and hip fractures are uncommon high energy injuries. In the literature no single method of treatment has emerged as superior to the others. A recent publication has documented the successful application of the rendezvous technique using dual-implants for treating these injuries. However in some cases, this technique may fail and revision surgery is required.Case presentationA 67-year old man sustained ipsilateral fractures of his femur and femoral neck in a road traffic accident. His injuries were treated by a dual construct consisting of a retrograde femoral nail and dynamic hip screw. Three months after surgery the hip screw cut out of the femoral head necessitating revision to a total hip arthroplasty. Surgery was carried out using a single stage two part procedure on a standard operating table without having to reposition or redrape the patient. There were no postoperative complications and at 1 year from surgery the patient is satisfied with the result and has returned to work.ConclusionConversion hip arthroplasty in the presence of dual implants is a technically challenging and unpredictable procedure, with an increased risk of complications. Our surgical approach provides a framework for orthopedic surgeons to safely perform this complex procedure.

Specific types of femoral head fractures: be alert for pre-, intra-, and post-operative ipsilateral femoral neck fractures following fracture-dislocation of the femoral head

PurposeIpsilateral femoral head and neck fractures (iFHNFs) are rare types of fractures that confer extremely poor prognosis among femoral head fractures (FHFs). Owing to the rarity of FHFs, it is challenging to diagnose iFHNFs. In addition, the clinical features of iFHNF have not yet been comprehensively elucidated. Therefore, this retrospective study aimed to summarize and analyze the clinical characteristics of iFHNF using a clinical diagnostic simulation based on a prospectively maintained database.MethodsClinical data of consecutive patients with FHFs, including gender, age, injury side, and associated injuries, were collected and analyzed from a prospectively maintained orthopedic database at a large level-I trauma center for a clinical diagnostic simulation. Patients were stratified according to the presence or absence of iFHNF. Moreover, propensity score matching (PSM) was used to create 1:1 age- and gender-matched couples. Lastly, clinical factors were compared and identified between the two groups before and after matching.ResultsA total of 218 FHF patients were included. Fifteen patients were diagnosed with ipsilateral femoral neck fractures (iFNFs), including preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative types. There were 177 male and 41 female patients, with a mean age of 40.0 ± 16.5 years. The incidence of two factors, namely acetabular fracture and posterior hip dislocation, were significantly different between the two groups (P < 0.05). Following PSM, 15 pairs of patients were generated. Comparisons revealed that the incidence of posterior hip dislocation was significantly different between the two groups (P < 0.05).ConclusionsThere were three types of iFHNFs. In the context of FHFs, posterior hip dislocation was associated with iFNFs. Thus, surgeons should remain vigilant, not only intraoperatively but also postoperatively, for iFNFs following FHF and concomitant posterior hip dislocation.Level of EvidenceDiagnostic level IV

Do All Pediatric Femoral Shaft Fractures Need a Computed Tomography Scan of the Ipsilateral Femoral Neck? Calculating the Incidence of Concomitant Femoral Neck and Shaft Fractures

In adults, the incidence of ipsilateral femoral neck fractures in the setting of femoral shaft fractures is reported to be as high as 9%; however, scant literature exists on the same clinical scenario in pediatric/adolescent populations. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of ipsilateral femoral neck fracture in the setting of femoral shaft fractures in children and adolescents treated in pediatric hospitals across the United States. The Pediatric Health Information System database was queried for patients aged 18 years or younger who were treated for a femoral neck, femoral shaft, and pertrochanteric femur fractures through an emergency department, inpatient, ambulatory surgery, or observation visit. Patients were identified using ICD-9 and ICD-10 diagnosis codes. Data from 49 pediatric hospitals between the years 2002 and 2020 were included. Incidence was calculated as the number of cases including the event divided by the total number of cases. A total of 90,146 records were identified from a cohort of 55,733,855 (0.16%). Distal femur fractures, pathologic fractures, and periprosthetic fractures were excluded, resulting in 65,651 unique cases. Of the 65,651 cases, 7104 (11%) were identified as isolated neck fractures. The combined incidence of femoral neck or pertrochanteric femur fractures in the setting of a femoral shaft fracture was 82.3 per 10,000 cases (0.82%). Only 283 cases of concomitant femoral neck and shaft fractures were found among 55,169 femoral shaft fractures (0.5%). The incidence of ipsilateral femoral neck or pertrochanteric femur fractures in the setting of a femoral shaft fracture is 82.3 per 10,000 patients (0.82%) based on data from Pediatric Health Information System-participating institutions. The incidence of femoral neck/pertrochanteric femur fractures and femoral shaft fractures in children and adolescents is more than 10 times lower than reported for adults; therefore, the routine use of advanced diagnostic imaging in pediatric patients with femoral shaft fractures should be considered cautiously. Level IV; cross-sectional analysis.

What Is the Best Treatment Choice for Concomitant Ipsilateral Femoral Neck and Intertrochanteric Fracture? A Retrospective Comparative Analysis of 115 Consecutive Patients.

Although a concomitant ipsilateral femoral neck and intertrochanteric fracture has been considered to be a rare type of injury, its incidence has been increasing, especially among elderly hip fracture patients. However, there is limited evidence on the optimal treatment option. This study surveys surgical outcomes of different implants in order to assist in selecting the best possible implant for a combined femoral neck and intertrochanteric fracture. The postoperative complications after the treatment of a concomitant ipsilateral femoral neck and intertrochanteric fracture via cephalomedullary nail (CMN), dynamic hip screw (DHS), and hip arthroplasty groups were analyzed by retrospectively reviewing the electronic medical records of 115 consecutive patients. The patient demographics and perioperative details showed no significant discrepancies amongst different surgical groups, except for the operative time; a CMN had the shortest mean operative time (standard deviation) of 85.6 min (31.1), followed by 94.7 min (22.3) during a DHS, and 107.3 min (37.2) during an HR (p = 0.021). Of the 84 osteosynthesis patients, 77 (91.7%) achieved a fracture union. Only one (3.2%) of the 31 HR cases had a dislocation. The sub-analysis of the different osteosynthesis methods showed a higher incidence of excessive sliding and the nonunion of the fracture fragment in the DHS group than that in the CMN group (p = 0.004 and p = 0.022, respectively). The different surgical methods did not significantly vary in other outcome variables, such as the re-operation rate, mortality, and hip function. For the surgical treatment of combined femoral neck and trochanteric fractures, osteosynthesis did not differ significantly from an HR in terms of the overall postoperative complications, reoperation and mortality rate, and hip function, however, the risk of nonunion and more mechanical complications should be considered when choosing a DHS. Our suggestion for the treatment of a femoral neck and ipsilateral trochanteric fracture is that a surgeon should choose wisely between an HR and a CMN depending on the patient's age, the displacement of the femoral neck, and one's expertise.

Protocolised MRI as an adjunct to CT in the diagnosis of femoral neck fracture in high energy ipsilateral femoral shaft fractures – A break-even analysis

BackgroundIn high-energy femoral shaft fractures (FSFs), ipsilateral femoral neck fractures (FNFs) can be missed by conventional trauma computed topography (CT) imaging, resulting in increased treatment costs and patient complications. Preliminary evidence suggests that a rapid, limited-sequence pelvis and hip magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol can identify these occult fractures and be feasibly implemented in the trauma setting. This study aims to establish the economic break-even point for implementing such an MRI protocol in all high-energy FSFs. MethodsWe used an adapted break-even economic tool to determine whether the costs of a targeted MRI protocol can be offset by cost-savings achieved through prevention of missed fractures (thus avoiding prolonged admission and re-operation). Sensitivity analyses were performed to demonstrate reliability of the economic modelling across a range of assumptions. ResultsAssuming a baseline of FNFs missed on CT of 12%, an MRI cost of £129 and cost of treating each missed FNF of £2457.5, the equation yielded a break-even rate of 7% and absolute risk reduction (ARR) of 5%, indicating that for every 100 FSFs, MRI would need to diagnose 5 of the 12 missed FNF to be economically viable (number needed to treat (NNT)=20). Economic viability was maintained even at double the cost of MRI, while increasing the cost of treating each complication served to reduce the ARR further, increasing cost-savings. ConclusionA rapid, limited-sequence MRI protocol to exclude occult ipsilateral FNFs in all high-energy FSFs appears to be economically justified measure. Further research exploring the feasibility of such a protocol, as well as the role of intra-operative fluoroscopy in this context, is required.

SP5.2.3 Protocolised MRI as an Adjunct to CT in the Diagnosis of Femoral Neck Fracture in High Energy Ipsilateral Femoral Shaft Fractures – a Breakeven Analysis

Abstract Background In high-energy femoral shaft fractures, ipsilateral femoral neck fractures can be missed by conventional trauma computed-topography (CT) imaging, resulting in increased treatment costs and patient complications. Evidence suggests that a rapid, limited-sequence pelvis and hip magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol can identify these occult fractures and be feasibly implemented in the trauma setting. This study aims to analyse the economic viability of implementing a such an MRI protocol for all high-energy femoral shaft fractures. Methods We used an adapted break-even economic tool to determine whether the costs of an MRI protocol can be offset by cost-savings achieved through prevention of missed fractures (thus avoiding prolonged inpatient admission, re-operation and implant costs). Sensitivity analyses were performed to demonstrate the reliability of the economic modelling across a range of assumptions. Results Assuming a baseline of hip fractures missed on CT of 12%, an MRI cost of £129 and cost of treating each missed hip fracture of £2633.5, the equation yielded a breakeven rate of 7% and absolute risk reduction (ARR) of 5%, indicating that for every 100 femoral shaft fractures, MRI would need to diagnose 5 of the 12 missed hip fractures to be economically viable (NNT=20). Economic viability was maintained even at double the cost of MRI, while increasing the cost of treating each complication served to reduce the ARR further, increasing cost effectiveness. Conclusion A rapid, limited-sequence MRI protocol to exclude occult ipsilateral hip fractures in all femoral shaft fractures would be an economically justified measure.

The surgical outcomes of fixing ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures: single versus double implants fixation

BackgroundCombined ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures are rare and present a challenging management dilemma. This study aims to assess the outcome of concomitant fixation of the ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fracture using single versus dual surgical implants.MethodsA single-center retrospective analysis of patients who underwent fixation of ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures was performed over a 13-year period. Different techniques were employed to fix the complex injury. Both the reduction and the union time were assessed radiographically.ResultsA total of 36 patients with ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures were retrospectively identified and included in the study. Twenty-four patients (66.6%) were managed with a single cephalomedullary nail, while the remaining cases were treated with two devices. All cases were operated on within an average of 3.7 ± 7.1 days. Eight patients (22.2%) developed postoperative complications. The average follow-up period was 7.3 ± 6.8 months. Although there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups, the femoral neck fractures showed shorter union time in patients treated with one implant compared to patients treated with two implants (3.0 ± 2.3 months vs. 4.2 ± 2.6 months). Another observation was that higher percentages of implant removal/failure and malunion/nonunion were seen in patients who had one implant compared to the two implants group (12.5% vs. 8.3%).ConclusionEarly surgical fixation of both fractures is associated with good outcome results. No difference in outcome was observed between both groups.

Ipsilateral Femoral Neck and Trochanter Fracture: A Case Report and Literature Review

Simultaneous ipsilateral femoral neck and trochanteric fracture is a rare injury. it occurs most commonly in elderly patients with low energy trauma. Its management present a significant challenge to the orthopaedic surgeons. We report the case of 77 years old male, who sustained simultaneous transcervical femoral neck and intertrochanteric fractures caused by an olive tree fall. The patient was treated with a standard gamma nail, with a satisfactory functional result at 3 months follow-up.

A comparison of the incidence of concomitant ipsilateral femoral neck fractures in ballistic versus blunt femur fractures.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the rate of ipsilateral femoral neck fractures in ballistic femur fractures and compare this to similar non-ballistic blunt fractures. A retrospective review of an institutional trauma database was completed at a single Level 1 trauma academic medical center. All patients treated for a ballistic or blunt femur fracture presenting to our institution between May 1, 2018, and February 29, 2020, were included. In all, 270 femur fractures were identified. We excluded 73, including 29 pediatric fractures and 44 geriatric peritrochanteric fractures. The final cohort included 197 femur fractures in 187 patients. Of the 197 femur fractures included, 68 were ballistic and 129 were blunt mechanism. Four ipsilateral femoral neck fractures were identified in the ballistic fracture cohort. There was no significant difference between ipsilateral femoral neck fractures associated with blunt femur fractures when compared with ballistic fractures, 7.7 versus 5.8%, respectively. We identified one occult femoral neck fracture that was associated with a ballistic 32-B3 femoral shaft fracture. The ipsilateral femoral neck fracture associated with the 32-B3 ballistic femoral shaft fracture was not identified on plain films (Fig.3A, B) and review of CTA during initial trauma workup. Identification of this fracture intra-operatively changed the treatment plan from standard proximal locking to recon proximal locking for this case. Patients included in the blunt fracture cohort were more likely to be poly-trauma patients with a higher rate of associated fractures. We detected no difference in rate of associated femoral neck fracture between blunt and ballistic femur fractures. These fractures can be missed on initial evaluation, which may lead to a delayed diagnosis and alter treatment plans. The authors conclude that treating surgeons must remain vigilant with a high index of suspicion for occult femoral neck fractures in patients who suffer ballistic femoral shaft fractures. Low-energy ballistic injuries should not rule out the possibility of an occult femoral neck fracture.