Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Medknow Publications, Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, 6(58), p. 552, 2010

DOI: 10.4103/0301-4738.71690

Springer, Indian Journal of Orthopaedics, 4(47), p. 429-429, 2013

DOI: 10.4103/0019-5413.114944

Springer, Indian Journal of Orthopaedics, 6(46), p. 640-645, 2012

DOI: 10.4103/0019-5413.104193

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Author's reply

Journal article published in 2013 by Rk Gupta, Rakesh Kumar Gupta, P. Gupta, Vinay Gupta, Vishali Gupta, Pawan Gupta, Amod Gupta, A. Gupta ORCID, Navdeep Gupta, N. Gupta
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Upload
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Upload
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Upload
Policy details
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Background: Dynamic hip screw (DHS) has been the standard treatment for stable trochanteric fracture patterns, but complications of lag screw cut out from a superior aspect, due to inadequate bone anchorage, occur frequently in elderly osteoporotic patients. Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) has been used as an augmentation tool to facilitate fixation stability in cadaveric femora for biomechanical studies and in pathological fractures. However, there are very few reports on the utilization of PMMA cement to prevent these complications in fresh intertrochanteric fractures. A prospective study was conducted to evaluate the outcome and efficacy of PMMA augmented DHS in elderly osteoporotic patients with intertrochanteric fractures. Materials and Methods: The study included 64 patients (AO type31-A2.1 in eight, A2.2 in 29, A2.3 in 17 patients, and 31-A3.1 in five, A3.2 in three, and A3.3 in two patients) with an average age of 72 years (60 − 94 years) of which 60 were available for final followup. PMMA augmentation of DHS was performed in all cases by injecting PMMA cement into the femoral head with a custommade gun designed by the authors. The clinical outcome was rated as per the Salvati and Wilson scoring system at the time of final followup of one year. Results were graded as excellent (score > 31), good (score 24 − 31), fair (score 16 − 23), and poor (score