Objective To compare the effects of biological prosthetic joint replacement, bone cement prosthetic joint replacement and proximal femoral anti-rotation intramedullary nail (PFNA) in the treatment of elderly patients with femoral intertrochanteric fracture.
Methods A total of 120 elderly patients with femoral intertrochanteric fracture were selected as research objects, and divided into biological group (given with biological prosthesis artificial joint replacement, 29 cases) and bone cement group (given bone cement prosthetic artificial joint replacement, 30 cases) and PFNA group (treated with PFNA, 61 cases) according to the different treatments. The treatment effects of the three groups were compared.
Results The amount of intraoperative blood loss in the biological group and the bone cement group was larger than that of the PFNA group, the operation time was longer than the PFNA group, the hospitalization cost was higher than the PFNA group, and the bed time and hospital stay were shorter than the PFNA group (P < 0.05). At 1 month, 6 and 12 months after surgery, the Visual Analogue Scale scores of the biological group and the bone cement group were lower than that of the PFNA group, and the Harris score was higher than that of the PFNA group (P < 0.05). The excellent and good rate of clinical efficacy in the biological group and the bone cement group was higher than that in the PFNA group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications among three groups (P>0.05).
Conclusion Biological prosthetic joint replacement and bone cement prosthetic joint replacement have better clinical effects than PFNA treatment for elderly patients with femoral intertrochanteric fractures, but PFNA internal fixation therapy has less intraoperative blood loss, shorter operation time and lower treatment cost.
DownLoad: