PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 20, 2026Journal of Orthopedics Traumatology and Rehabilitation0 citationsOpen Access

Reduction and Fixation by Proximal Femoral Nail versus Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation-2 among Patients with Unstable Intertrochanteric Fracture

View Full Paper
RBRishabh BhattRMRajesh MaheshwariSKSanad Kumar

Key Points

  • This study aims to compare short-term radiological outcomes between proximal femoral nail (PFN) and PFN Antirotation-2 (PFNA-2) in unstable intertrochanteric fractures.
  • Randomized trial with 62 patients divided into PFN (n=31) and PFNA-2 (n=31) groups.
  • Reduction quality assessed using Chang’s criteria and neck–shaft angle.
  • Implant positioning evaluated with tip–apex distance (TAD) and Cleveland index.
  • Optimal implant placement achieved in 77.4% of PFN cases and 90.4% of PFNA-2 cases.
  • PFN group had a higher mean TAD compared to PFNA-2, indicating lower stability for PFN.
  • Both groups maintained neck–shaft angles above 120° with acceptable to excellent reductions.

Abstract

Abstract Background: The incidence of intertrochanteric (IT) fractures has risen due to increasing osteoporosis and an aging population. Proximal femoral nail (PFN) is a commonly used fixation method, while the PFN Antirotation II (PFNA-2) employs a single helical blade designed to improve rotational control, stability, and compression. Objective: To compare short-term radiological outcomes (reduction quality, fixation stability, and implant positioning) between PFN and PFNA-2 in unstable IT fractures, and to document early postoperative complications. Methodology: Sixty-two patients with unstable IT fractures were allocated to PFN ( n = 31) or PFNA-2 ( n = 31) groups based on the surgeon’s discretion. Reduction quality was assessed using Chang’s criteria and neck–shaft angle; implant positioning was evaluated with tip–apex distance (TAD) and Cleveland index. Radiological follow-up occurred on postoperative day 1, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. Results: Mean ages were 70.23 ± 12.68 years (PFN) and 73.58 ± 12.86 years (PFNA-2), with most patients being female. Both groups maintained mean neck–shaft angles above 120° and demonstrated acceptable to excellent reductions per Chang’s criteria. The PFN group had a higher mean TAD compared to PFNA-2. Optimal implant placement was achieved in 77.4% of PFN cases and 90.4% of PFNA-2 cases. Conclusion: Both PFN and PFNA-2 provide stable fixation for unstable IT fractures. PFNA-2 showed a trend toward lower TAD, indicating better stability. Precise positioning of the helical blade is essential to prevent cut-out or joint penetration. Larger studies with longer follow-up are needed to confirm these findings.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bhatt et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0d4ec0f03e14405aa99f11https://doi.org/10.4103/jotr.jotr_63_25
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper