The efficacy of dynamic compression locking system vs. dynamic hip screw in the treatment of femoral neck fractures: a comparative study.

BACKGROUND

There is still a lack of consensus on which internal fixation method can better maintain the stability of femoral neck fractures (FNF), promote fracture healing, and reduce postoperative complications such as femoral head necrosis and nonunion. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the novel dynamic compression locking system (DCLS) versus dynamic hip screw (DHS) in the treatment of FNF.

METHODS

Fifty cases of FNF from July 2018 to February 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. According to different treatment methods, they were divided into DCLS group (26 cases) and DHS group (24 cases). Baseline data, intraoperative and postoperative clinical data, reoperation rate, and Harris score were collected to evaluate the clinical efficacy.

RESULTS

All patients were followed up for 24 months. All "fractures" were caused by fall. The baseline data of the two groups were comparable (P > 0.05). There weren't significant differences in the length of hospital stay and mobility after two years postoperatively between the two groups (P > 0.05). The operation time, blood loss, incision length, fluoroscopy times and the degree of femoral neck shortening after two years postoperatively in the DCLS group were significantly less than those in the DHS group (all P < 0.05). Harris score after two years postoperatively in the DCLS group was significantly higher than that in the DHS group (P < 0.05). Although the reoperation rate in the DHS group was slightly higher than that in the DCLS group, it wasn't statistical significance (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with DHS, DCLS in the treatment of FNF had less surgical trauma, shorter incision length, shorter operation time, lower radiation dose and higher Harris scores. Although the reoperation rate in the DHS group was slightly higher than that in the DCLS group, it wasn't statistical difference. Further research is needed.