Retrospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Orthop. Nov 18, 2020; 11(11): 483-491
Published online Nov 18, 2020. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v11.i11.483
Table 1 Demographic details and fracture characteristics in the proximal femoral nail and proximal femoral nail antirotation groups

PFN group
PFNA group
P value
Number of patients7385NA
Male:female31:4237:480.893
Age, yr76.6 (65-90)74.9 (65-92)0.213
BMI, kg/m221.4 (18.5-31.6)22.8 (20.4-28.3)0.576
Femoral BMD, T-score-2.83 (-1.3 to -5.3)-3.14(-1.1 to -6.1)0.518
Charlson Comorbidity Index[15]13.4 (3-18)11.9 (4-19)0.536
Cause of injury0.890
Slip down5665
Traffic accident811
Fall down99
AO/OTA classification0.750
31-A11419
31-A24250
31-A31716
Stay before operation, d4.02 (1-13)2.84 (1-17)0.253
Table 2 Clinical outcomes in the proximal femoral nail and proximal femoral nail antirotation groups

PFN group
PFNA group
P value
Operation time, min67.363.20.395
Salvati and Wilson score score[16]0.328
Excellent (32 or more)2636
Good (24-31)3544
Fair (16-23)84
Poor (15 or less)41
Excellent + good61 (83.6%)80 (94.1%)0.033
Mortality within one year16 (21.9%)20 (23.5%)0.629
Table 3 Radiographic results in the proximal femoral nail and proximal femoral nail antirotation groups

PFN group
PFNA group
P value
Reduction0.830
Good, n (%)34 (46.6%)42 (49.4%),
Normal, n (%)31 (42.5%)36 (42.4%)
Poor87
Cleveland Index0.577
Zone 100
Zone 210
Zone 300
Zone 422
Zone 53442
Zone 61115
Zone 734
Zone 81419
Zone 983
Zone 5 + 6 + 8 + 9, n (%)67 (91.8%)79 (92.9%)0.218
TAD, mm7.2 (2.1-12.3)7.9 (3.6-14.9)0.222
Union rate, % (n)87.7 (64/73)94.1 (80/85)0.155
Union time, wk14.9 (12-17)13.7 (11-18)0.156
Sliding distance, mm6.1 (0-23.6)3.2 (0-18.4)0.036
Table 4 Complications in both groups

PFN group
PFNA group
P value
Screw cutout, n (%)8 (11.0%)2 (2.4%)0.027
Nonunion, n (%)9 (12.3%)5 (5.9%)0.155
Infection210.473
ONFH100.279
Implant breakage100.279