Comparison of Ordinary Cannulated Compression Screw and Double-Head Cannulated Compression Screw Fixation in Vertical Femoral Neck Fractures

Abstract EN

Background.

The treatment of vertical femoral neck fractures in young patients remains a challenge.

This study is aimed at comparing ordinary cannulated compression screw (OCCS) and double-head cannulated compression screw (DhCCS) fixation in vertical femoral neck fractures both clinically and biomechanically.

Materials and Methods.

Clinically, the radiographs of 81 patients with Pauwel’s III femoral neck fractures, including 54 fractures fixed with three parallel OCCSs and 27 fractures fixed with three parallel DhCCSs, were reviewed retrospectively.

Complications consisting of fixation failure (screw loosening, obvious fracture displacement, varus deformity, or femoral neck shortening), bony nonunion, and avascular necrosis (AVN) were determined.

Biomechanically, twenty synthetic femur models of vertical femoral fractures with an 80° Pauwel’s angle were divided into two groups and subsequently fixed with three parallel OCCSs or DhCCSs.

All specimens were tested for axial stiffness, load to 5 mm displacement, and a maximum load to failure with a loading rate of 2 mm/min.

Results.

Clinically, 22 fractures in the OCCS group experienced fixation failure, including 19 screw loosening, 18 femoral neck shortening, 14 varus deformities, and 8 obvious fracture displacements, whereas only 4 fractures experienced fixation failure in the DhCCS group, including 3 screw loosening, 3 femoral neck shortening, 3 varus deformities, and 1 obvious fracture displacement.

Additionally, 11 fractures in the OCCS group exhibited nonunion, whereas only 3 in the DhCCS group exhibited nonunion.

Nine fractures with AVN were noted in the OCCS group, whereas only 1 was observed in the DhCCS group.

Biomechanically, the axial stiffness of the DhCCS group was greater than that of the OCCS group (154.9±6.81 vs.

128.1±7.41 N/mm), and the load to 5 mm displacement was also significantly greater in the DhCCS group (646.1±25.87 vs.

475.8±21.46 N).

Moreover, the maximum load to failure in the DhCCS group exhibited significant advantages compared with that of the OCCS group (1148±39.47 vs.

795.9±51.39 N).

Conclusion.

Our results suggested that using three DhCCSs improved the outcome of vertical femoral neck fractures compared to three OCCSs, offering a new choice for the treatment of femoral neck fracture.