The impact of cerclage cabling on unstable intertrochanteric and subtrochanteric femoral fractures: a retrospective review of 465 patients
- 13 Downloads
To assess the potential impact of using cerclage cables or wires when undertaking fixation of unstable intertrochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures.
Patients were identified from a validated hospital database which included patients from all trauma units within Northern Ireland from 2008 to 2015. The primary outcome measure was return to theatre for any reason. Secondary outcome measures included quality of reduction, tip–apex distance, length of stay, mortality at 3 and 12 months and functional outcomes assessed by Barthel Index and mobility.
465 patients were included (157 in the cerclage/wire group and 308 without). Mean age of 79.6 years, with 330 females and 135 males. There was no statistical difference between the groups in relation to baseline demographics and risk factors for complications. 24 patients required further surgery, 13 (8.3%) in the cerclage group and 11 (3.6%) in those without (p < 0.03). Cabling of intertrochanteric fractures resulted in further surgery in 9.1% versus 3.4% without. Quality of reduction was improved in the cerclage group (p < 0.01), however improvements were less noticeable in intertrochanteric fractures (32.3% classified as good) compared to subtrochanteric fractures (52.4% good). Length of stay was longer in the cerclage group (p < 0.01). No differences were noted in mortality, Barthel score or mobility at 3 and 12 months.
Cerclage cables/wires can augment fixation in subtrochanteric fractures with potential benefits including improving quality of reduction. Evidence for their use in intertrochanteric fractures is much more contentious and we would advise they only be used where a definite improvement in reduction can be obtained with the minimum number possible.
KeywordsCerclage wire Cable Intertrochanteric Subtrochanteric Hip fracture
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Paul Karayiannis and Andrew James declare they have no conflict of interest.
- 2.International Osteoporosis Foundation: Hip fractures. https://www.iofbonehealth.org/facts-statistics#category16. Accessed Mar 2017.
- 3.Centers for disease control and prevention: Hip Fractures amongst older adults.Google Scholar
- 4.Parker MJ, Pryor GA, Anand JK, Lodwick R, Myles JW. A comparison of presenting characteristics of patients with intracapsular and extracapsular proximal femoral fractures. J R Soc Med. 85. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1294817/. Accessed Mar 1992.
- 5.Hip Fracture: Evidence Update March 2013. A summary of selected new evidence relevant to NICE clinical guideline 124. The Management of Hip Fractures in Adults 2011.Google Scholar
- 6.Riehl JT, Koval KJ, Langford JR, Munro MW, Kupiszewski SJ, Haidukewych GJ. Intramedullary nailing of subtrochanteric fractures: does malreduction matter? Bull Hosp Jt Dis. 2014;72(2):159–63.Google Scholar
- 9.Wahnert D, Lenz M, Schlegel U, Perren S, Windolf M. Cerclage handling for improved fracture treatment. A biomechanical study on the twisting procedure. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Čech. 2011;78(3):208.Google Scholar
- 10.Charnley J. The closed treatment of common fractures. 3rd ed. London: E. and S. Livingstone Ltd; 1961.Google Scholar
- 12.Perren S, Fernandez A, Regazzoni P. Fracture fixation using cerclage cables. ICUC One Page Paper. September 2015.Google Scholar
- 13.National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) annual report 2016. http://web1.crownaudit.org/Report2016/NHFD2016Report.pdf. Accessed 21 Feb 2017.
- 16.Berton C, Puskas GJ, Christofilopoulos P, et al. Comparison of the outcome following the fixation of osteotomies or fractures associated with total hip replacement using cables or wires: the results at five years. J Bone Jt Surg Br. 2012;94-B:1475–81. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.94B11.29687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Muller T, Tropp T, Kuhne CA, Gebhart G, Ruchholtz S, Zettle R. The benefit of wire cerclage stabilisation of the medial hinge in intramedullary nailing for the treatment of subtrochanteric femoral fractures: a biomechanical study. Int Orthop. 2011;35:1237–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-010-1204-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar