<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>142(7)</volume><submitter>van der Sijp MPL</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Introduction&lt;/h4>Both the DHS and the PFNA are common and well-studied treatment options for stable trochanteric fractures. The aim of the current study was to compare the implant failure rates of these two implants in 31A1 type trochanteric femoral fractures.&lt;h4>Materials and methods&lt;/h4>A single-centre observational cohort study was conducted in the Hip Fracture Unit of a multicentre level 1 trauma teaching hospital between December 2016 and October 2018. Patients with an AO/OTA type 31A1 fracture were included. Pathological fractures, bilateral fractures, high-energy traumas and patients younger than 18 years of age were excluded. Surgery was performed using either a DHS or PFNA. Both were used routinely for stable trochanteric fractures, and allocation was decided by the surgeon pe</pubmed_abstract><journal>Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery</journal><pagination>1459-1467</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC9217838</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>High risks of failure observed for A1 trochanteric femoral fractures treated with a DHS compared to the PFNA in a prospective observational cohort study.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC9217838</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Niggebrugge AHP</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>van der Sijp MPL</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Meylaerts SA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Verhage SM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Schipper IB</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>de Groot M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>du Pre KJ</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>High risks of failure observed for A1 trochanteric femoral fractures treated with a DHS compared to the PFNA in a prospective observational cohort study.</name><description>&lt;h4>Introduction&lt;/h4>Both the DHS and the PFNA are common and well-studied treatment options for stable trochanteric fractures. The aim of the current study was to compare the implant failure rates of these two implants in 31A1 type trochanteric femoral fractures.&lt;h4>Materials and methods&lt;/h4>A single-centre observational cohort study was conducted in the Hip Fracture Unit of a multicentre level 1 trauma teaching hospital between December 2016 and October 2018. Patients with an AO/OTA type 31A1 fracture were included. Pathological fractures, bilateral fractures, high-energy traumas and patients younger than 18 years of age were excluded. Surgery was performed using either a DHS or PFNA. Both were used routinely for stable trochanteric fractures, and allocation was decided by the surgeon pe</description><dates><release>2022-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2022 Jul</publication><modification>2025-04-21T14:11:51.468Z</modification><creation>2024-11-13T04:04:55.67Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC9217838</accession><cross_references><pubmed>33635400</pubmed><doi>10.1007/s00402-021-03824-0</doi></cross_references></HashMap>