Functional Outcome of Intertrochanteric Fractures Treated with Proximal Femoral Nail

  • Anilkumar Bapugouda Patil Former Associate Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Shri B M Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Bijapur
Keywords: intertrochanteric femoral fractures, subtrochanteric extension, rod traffic accident


Background: Intertrochanteric fractures are common in old age group. These fractures are three to four times more common in elderly women, and the mechanism of injury is usually due to low energy trauma like simple fall or due to road traffic accidents.

Methods: Total 120 cases of fracture were included in this study. Out of 120 cases fracture were seen due to fall in 108 cases and due to road traffic accident in 12 cases. This study was conducted in Department of Orthopedics. The duration of study was over a period of one and half year.

Results: In this study, we were included total 120 cases. Among all cases 70 were female and rests were male. We were found 12 cases of rod traffic accident & 108 cases sustained the fracture due to fall.

Conclusions: This study concludes that the PFN should be the method of choice for surgical treatment of intertrochanteric femoral fractures.




Download data is not yet available.


1. Babhulkar Sudhir S. Management of trochanteric Fractures. Indian J Orthop. 2006;40:210-8.
2. Canale ST, Beaty JH. Campbell‘s Operative orthopaedics. 12th edition. Elsevier; 2012.
3. Shakeel A et al.: Comparative study of functional outcome of the intertrochanteric fracture of femur managed by dynamic hip screw and proximal femoral nail, National journal of clinical orthopedics 2019;3(1):26-30.
4. Rockwood & Green's Fractures in Adults, Intertrochanteric fractures. 7th edition. Lippincot Williams and Wilkins; Philadelphia, 2010. Dhiraj VS. Evans – classification of intertrochanteric fractures and their clinical importance. Trauma International. 2015; 1(1):7-11.
5. Doherty jh and Lyden jp : Intertrochanteric fractures of the hip treated with compression screws Analysis of problems, Clin Ortho 1979; 141:184-187.
6. Murray RC, Frew JF. Trochanteric fractures of the femur; a plea for conservative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1949;31B:204-1
7. Pavelka T, Houcek P, Linhart M, Matejka J. Osteosynthesis of hip and femoral shaft fractures using the PFN-long. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech 2007;74:91-8.
8. Curtis MJ, Jinnah RH, Wilson V, Cunningham BW. Proximal femoral fractures: A biomechanical study to compare intramedullary and extramedullary fixation. Injury 1994;25:99-104.
9. Menezes DF, Gamulin A, Noesberger B. Is the proximal femoral nail a suitable implant for treatment of all trochanteric fractures? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005;439:221-7.
10. Ansari Moein CM, Verhofstad MH, Bleys RL, van der Werken C. Soft tissue injury related to choice of entry point in antegrade femoral nailing: Piriform fossa or greater trochanter tip. Injury 2005;36:1337-42.
11. Gadegone WM, Salphale YS. Proximal femoral nail – An analysis of 100 cases of proximal femoral fractures with an average follow up of 1 year. Int Orthop 2007;31:403-8.
12. Cyril jonnes ms, Shishir sm, type II inter trochanteric fractures PFN vs DHS, arch bone Jt Surg . 2016 : 4 (1) : 23-28
13. Pajarinen j,LindahL et al; Pertrochanteric femoral fractures treated with dynamic hip screws or a proximal femoral nail: A randomized study comparing post-operative rehabilitation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005; 87(1):76–81.
How to Cite
Patil AB. Functional Outcome of Intertrochanteric Fractures Treated with Proximal Femoral Nail. Int Arch BioMed Clin Res [Internet]. 2020Sep.30 [cited 2021May9];6(3):OP1-OP3. Available from: