Details all types internal fixation of the displaced neck of femur fracture with advantage and disadvantage
"femoral neck fracture" AND "internal fixation"
| Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|
| Minimally invasive, percutaneous technique | High nonunion rate in displaced fractures (20-30%) |
| Preserves periosteal blood supply | Significant femoral neck shortening - >1 cm in 42% of Garden I and 63% of Garden II fractures |
| Technically simple | Rotational instability if not placed correctly |
| Low implant cost | Cannot support vertical shear (Pauwels III) fractures adequately |
| Allows controlled dynamic compression | No fixed-angle stability |
| Early mobilization possible | Higher nonunion rate than fixed-angle devices (though not statistically significant in FAITH trial) |
| Short operative time | Risk of screw back-out and loss of fixation in osteoporotic bone |
| Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|
| Excellent rotational and axial stability | More invasive than percutaneous screws |
| Dynamic controlled collapse promotes union | Higher rate of AVN reported (9% vs. 5% for cannulated screws in FAITH trial) |
| Biomechanically superior for basicervical fractures | Large implant - more bone destruction |
| FAITH trial subgroup: potential benefit in displaced fractures, basicervical fractures, and smokers | Requires a tap in non-osteoporotic bone |
| DHS + derotational screw biomechanically stronger than 3 CCS in unstable basicervical fractures | Not ideal without supplemental derotational screw (which was not used in FAITH protocol) |
| Lower reoperation rate than CCS in some retrospective studies | Risk of cut-out in osteoporotic bone |
| Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|
| Superior biomechanical stability in Pauwels type III (vertical shear) fractures vs. CCS and DHS | Clinical results have been disappointing overall |
| Fixed-angle construct resists shear forces | High incidence of catastrophic failure reported (cut-out, plate breakage) |
| Multiple diverging locking screws distribute load | More extensive surgical exposure required |
| Useful when significant femoral neck comminution is present | Does not allow controlled shortening - leads to stress concentration |
| Targon locking plate allows some controlled shortening - improved design | Femoral neck shortening linked to pain and decreased mobility in >500 patient study |
| High cost |
| Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|
| Biomechanical stability similar to DHS, superior to multiple CCS | Newer device - less long-term data |
| Lower reported rates of AVN compared with CCS | Limited availability in all centers |
| Reduced femoral neck shortening vs. CCS | Technical learning curve |
| Decreased fluoroscopy use (shorter operative time) | Early failure reported in some series (associated with technical errors) |
| Improved functional outcomes vs. CCS in emerging data | |
| Less implant bulk than PFLP | |
| Single implant - less hardware in femoral head |
| Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|
| Prevents femoral neck shortening (mean shortening ~1.7 mm vs. >10 mm with partial threads) | Technically demanding |
| Union rate up to 94% in selected series (Boraiah et al., 54 patients) | Requires anatomic reduction first - if reduction is poor, non-union risk is high |
| Preserves abductor lever arm and functional outcome | Larger series currently lacking |
| Compatible with open reduction techniques | At least one study reported high complication rates |
| Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|
| Lower failure rates vs. screws alone in comminuted fractures | Requires open approach with wider dissection |
| Directly supports the medial cortex where compressive forces are greatest | Risk of injury to medial femoral circumflex artery |
| Evidence: Collinge et al. showed lower failure rates in young adults with high-energy displaced fractures | Additional implant and complexity |
| Useful for Pauwels III fractures | Not routinely needed in low-energy fractures |
| Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|
| Load-sharing device (intramedullary - biomechanically favourable) | Technically demanding nail insertion |
| Ideal for ipsilateral femoral neck + shaft fractures | High rates of complication in isolated displaced neck fractures |
| Minimal soft tissue dissection | Less controlled compression across neck fracture |
| Not ideal for isolated subcapital/transcervical fractures |
| Device | Best Indication | Key Risk |
|---|---|---|
| Cannulated screws (3) | Most displaced NOF in young patients; subcapital | Nonunion, shortening |
| DHS ± derotational screw | Basicervical, displaced, smokers | AVN (slightly higher) |
| Femoral Neck System (FNS) | Displaced fractures; good bone stock | Early failure if technical error |
| Proximal femoral locking plate | Comminuted neck fractures | Catastrophic plate failure |
| Fully threaded screws | When length preservation is priority | Technically demanding |
| Medial buttress plate | Comminuted, Pauwels III, young high-energy | Wider dissection; vascular risk |
| Cephalomedullary nail | Ipsilateral neck + shaft fracture | Technical complexity |
Source: Campbell's Operative Orthopaedics, 15th Ed. 2026, Chapter 60 (Femoral Neck Fractures), pp. 3434-3447
Systematic review of internal fixation of displaced neck of femur fracture
"femoral neck fracture" AND "internal fixation" AND displaced
"femoral neck fracture" AND "cannulated screws" AND outcomes
"femoral neck fracture" AND "dynamic hip screw" AND fixation
PMID: 37626370
PMID: 36437167
PMID: 37055749
PMID: 36201031
PMID: 39695853
PMID: 39533559
PMID: 27779172
PMID: 12954824
PMID: 25480307
PMID: 39827529
PMID: 38419236
PMID: 35914756
PMID: 41827005
FAITH trial femoral neck fracture fixation hip fractures
"femoral neck fracture" AND "avascular necrosis" AND "internal fixation" AND risk
PMID: 28262269
PMID: 25554424
PMID: 31165917
| Complication | Overall Rate | Displaced Fractures |
|---|---|---|
| Reoperation | 18.0% | Higher |
| Avascular Necrosis (AVN) | 14.3% | Higher |
| Nonunion | 9.3% | Higher |
| Malunion | 7.1% | - |
| Implant failure | 9.7% | - |
| Surgical site infection | 5.1% | - |
Conclusion: Neither implant is universally superior for reoperation. The sliding hip screw carries a higher AVN risk but may benefit select subgroups.
| Outcome | Ranking (Best to Worst) |
|---|---|
| Shortest operation time | CS > DHS > HA > THA |
| Least intraoperative blood loss | CS > DHS > HA > THA |
| Best functional outcome (HHS at 2 years) | THA > HA > CS > DHS |
| Best quality of life (EQ-5D at 2 years) | THA > HA > CS > DHS |
| Lowest reoperation risk | THA > HA > DHS > CS |
| Outcome | FNS vs. CS | Result |
|---|---|---|
| X-ray exposures | WMD -10.16 (95% CI -11.44 to -8.88) | FNS better |
| Fracture healing time | WMD -1.54 months (95% CI -2.38 to -0.70) | FNS better |
| Femoral neck shortening | WMD -2.01 mm (95% CI -3.11 to -0.91) | FNS better |
| Femoral head necrosis | OR 0.27 (95% CI 0.08-0.83; p=0.02) | FNS better |
| Implant failure/cut-out | OR 0.28 (95% CI 0.10-0.82; p=0.02) | FNS better |
| VAS pain score | WMD -1.27 (95% CI -2.51 to -0.04) | FNS better |
| Harris Hip Score | WMD +4.15 (95% CI 1.00-7.30; p=0.01) | FNS better |
| Outcome | Fully Threaded (FCS) vs. Partially Threaded (PCS) |
|---|---|
| Femoral head necrosis | OR 0.60 (95% CI 0.37-0.98; p=0.04) - FCS lower |
| Internal fixation failure | OR 0.37 (95% CI 0.22-0.62; p=0.0002) - FCS lower |
| Femoral neck shortening | OR 0.27 (95% CI 0.19-0.40; p<0.00001) - FCS dramatically lower |
| Harris Hip Score | No significant difference |
| Nonunion rate | No significant difference |
| Outcome | Non-Parallel vs. Parallel | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| Femoral head necrosis | OR 0.50 (95% CI 0.34-0.74; p=0.0005) | 50% reduction |
| Nonunion | OR 0.41 (95% CI 0.26-0.65; p=0.0001) | 59% reduction |
| Femoral neck shortening | OR 0.40 (95% CI 0.28-0.57; p<0.00001) | 60% reduction |
| Fixation failure | OR 0.34 (95% CI 0.22-0.52; p<0.00001) | 66% reduction |
| Outcome | Best Device (SUCRA) |
|---|---|
| Lowest intraoperative bleeding | Inverted triangle CCS (SUCRA 0.87) |
| Best Harris Hip Score | MBP (SUCRA 0.85) |
| Lowest complication rate | MBP (SUCRA 0.93) |
| Fastest fracture healing | MBP (SUCRA 0.81) |
| Shortest operation time | FNS (SUCRA 0.77) |
| Least neck shortening | FNS (SUCRA 0.79) |
| Risk Factor | Odds Ratio | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Female sex | 1.78 | 1.26-2.52 |
| Smoking | 3.64 | 1.68-7.91 |
| Age >50 years | 3.64 | 1.68-7.91 |
| Inadequate fracture reduction | 2.28 | 1.62-3.22 |
| CS/pins vs. fixed-angle devices | 2.16 | 1.03-4.54 |
| Clinical Question | Evidence-Based Answer | Source |
|---|---|---|
| IF vs. arthroplasty in elderly displaced FNF | Arthroplasty superior (lower reoperation, better function) | Ye 2016; Ramadanov 2023 |
| IF vs. arthroplasty in young patients | IF preferred (preserves native femoral head) | - |
| CS vs. DHS overall | No difference in reoperation; DHS higher AVN but benefits displaced/basicervical/smokers | FAITH trial 2017 |
| FNS vs. CS | FNS significantly better (AVN, shortening, union, function) | Jiang 2023; Patel 2023 |
| FNS vs. DHS | FNS better operative efficiency; similar complication rates | Jiang 2024 |
| Parallel vs. non-parallel screws | Non-parallel (inverted triangle) dramatically superior | Jia 2026 |
| Fully vs. partially threaded screws | Fully threaded: less AVN, less failure, less shortening | Jia 2024 |
| MBP in Pauwels II/III | Best outcomes in young adults (lowest complications/best HHS) | Yuan 2024; McGarry 2025 |
| CMN vs. DHS in basicervical | Both acceptable; CMN achieves faster union | Yoon 2022 |
| Open vs. closed reduction | CRIF preferred (no difference in AVN/nonunion; ORIF 8x infection risk) | Ghayoumi 2015 |
| Risk factors for fixation failure | Smoking, age >50, female sex, poor reduction, CS use | Kalsbeek 2023 |
| Study | Design | N | Evidence Tier |
|---|---|---|---|
| FAITH trial (Lancet 2017) | Multicentre RCT | 1,108 | Tier 1 RCT |
| Ramadanov 2023 | Network meta-analysis (33 RCTs) | 5,703 | Tier 1 |
| Ye 2016 | Systematic review + MA (8 RCTs) | 2,206 | Tier 1 |
| Shehata 2019 | Systematic review + MA (10 RCTs) | 1,934 | Tier 1 |
| Slobogean 2015 | Meta-analysis (41 studies) | 1,558 | Tier 2 |
| Bhandari 2003 | Meta-analysis (14 RCTs) | 1,901 | Tier 2 |
| Jia 2026 (parallel screws) | Systematic review + MA (20 studies) | 1,508 | Tier 1 |
| Yuan 2024 | Network meta-analysis (34 studies) | 2,291 | Tier 1 |
| Patel/Jiang 2023 (FNS vs. CS) | Systematic review + MA | 448-509 | Tier 1 |
| McGarry 2025 (MBP) | Systematic review | 642 | Tier 1 |
| Kalsbeek 2023 | Systematic review + MA (16 studies) | - | Tier 1 |
| Ghayoumi 2015 | Systematic review (21 studies) | - | Tier 1 |