Trochanteric Antegrade Nail
Trochanteric Antegrade Nail
A 95% union rate would indicate success, but the amount of patients who make a functional recovery after fracture continues to fall short.1 Comparisons of cephalomedullary nails with sliding hip screws have found no difference in functional outcomes, indicating that current devices have not solved the problem.2
The fourth generation offers a better solution – an implant with improved translational and rotational stability of the femoral head, neck and shaft. The TRIGEN◊ INTERTAN◊ nail achieves greater stability through its unique shape and dynamic linear compression. And this is leading to an improvement in functional outcomes, with one study showing 58% of patients treated with the INTERTAN◊ nail recovering their prefracture status.3
VIDEO: Click here to watch a video of how TRIGEN◊ INTERTAN◊ works.
References
1. Koval KJ; Zuckerman JD. Functional recovery after fracture of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg (A). 1994: 76-1, 751-758.
2. Parker MJ; Handoll HH. Gamma and other cephalocondylic intramedullary nails versus extramedullary implants for extracapsular fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jul 16; (3): CD000093.
3. Ruecker AH; Rupprecht M; Gruber M; Gebauer M; Barvencik F; Briem D; Rueger JM. The treatment of intertrochanteric fractures: Results using an intramedullary nail with integrated cephalocervical screws and linear compression. J Orthop Trauma. Vol. 23, No. 1, Jan. 2009.
4. Noble PC; Alexander JW; Lindahl LJ; Yew DT; Granberry WM; Tullos HS. The anatomic basis of femoral component design. Clin Orthop. 235: 1148-165, October 1988
5. Russell TA; Summy SA; Whitten SA. Evaluation of cyclic cut-out failure in intramedullary nails using a single lag screw or two integrated interlocking screws. Poster Presentation. 2006 Annual Meeting, American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, Chicago, IL.