Skip to main content
PMC home page
International Orthopaedics logoLink to International Orthopaedics
. 2005 Feb 16;29(2):101–104. doi: 10.1007/s00264-004-0627-1

Interlocking nail for femoral shaft fractures: is dynamization always necessary?

D Tigani 1,✉, M Fravisini 1, C Stagni 1, R Pascarella 2, S Boriani 2
PMCID: PMC3474504  PMID: 15714303

Abstract

A series of 179 closed femoral fractures treated by static interlocking nailing (Grosse-Kempf nail) was reviewed to evaluate the effect of dynamization on the time to bony union. In 75 patients, dynamization was performed whereas in 104 the implant was left static. Union occurred in 178 patients. We observed one infection. Time to union was significantly shorter in the static group (103 days) compared to the dynamized group (126 days).

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (123.8 KB).

References

  • 1.Basumallick MN, Bandopadhyay A. Effect of dynamization in open interlocking nailing of femoral fractures. A prospective randomized comparative study of 50 cases with a 2-year follow-up. Acta Orthop Belg. 2002;68:42–48. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Brumback RJ. Intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures. Part II: fracture-healing with static interlocking fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988;70:1453–1462. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Brumback RJ. The rationales of interlocking nailing of the femur, tibia and humerus. An overview. Clin Ortop. 1996;324:292–320. doi: 10.1097/00003086-199603000-00036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Dagrenat D, Moncade N, Cordey J, Rahn BA, Kempf I, Perren SM. Effects of the dynamization of static bolt nailing. In vivo experimentation. Rev Chir Orthop Repar Appar Mot (Suppl) 1988;2:100–104. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Gustillo RB, Anderson JT. Prevention of infection in the treatment of one thousand and twenty-five open fractures of long bones. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976;58:453–458. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Kempf I, Grosse A, Beck G. Closed locked intramedullary nailing. Its application to comminuted fractures of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1985;47:709–720. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Kempf I, Grosse A, Laffourge D. L’apport du verrouillage dans l’enclouage centromédullaire des os longs. Rev Chir Orthop Repar Appar Mot. 1978;64:635–651. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Muller M, Nazarian S, Koch P. Classification AO des Fracturens. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer Verlag; 1978. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Tigani D, Giunti A, Boriani S. Ostesintesi con chiodo di endomidollare avvitato: difficoltà, limiti, prospettive. Chir Organi Mov. 1986;71:227–233. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Tigani D, Moscato M, Sabetta E, Padovani G, Boriani S. Breakage of the Grosse-Kempf nail: causes and remedies. Ital J Orthop Traumatol. 1989;15:185–190. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Winquist RA, Hansen ST. Comminuted fractures of the femoral shaft treated by intramedullary nailing. Orthop Clin North Am. 1980;11:633–640. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Wu CC. The effect of dynamization on slowing the healing of femur shaft fractures after interlocking nailing. J Trauma. 1997;43:263–267. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199708000-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Wu CC, Chen W. Healing of 56 segmental femoral shaft fractures after locked nailing. Acta Orthop Scand. 1997;68:541–544. doi: 10.3109/17453679708999022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from International Orthopaedics are provided here courtesy of Springer-Verlag

RESOURCES