Objective. To compare and analyze the clinical efficacy of proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) and percutaneous compression plate (PCCP) for minimally invasive treatment of femoral intertrochanteric fractures. Methods. A retrospective analysis of 98 patients with femoral intertrochanteric fractures admitted to our hospital from January 2019 to December 2020 was used as the research object, and they were divided into PFNA group and PCCP group according to different treatment methods, with 51 cases and 47 cases. The intraoperative and postoperative indicators were compared between the two groups of patients. Results. There was no significant difference in the operative time, postoperative fracture healing time, and Harris score of hip joint function between the two groups (t = −1.43, 1.86, 1.63; ). Compared with the PFNA group, the intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume in the PCCP group were lower than those in the PFNA group (t = 11.38, 9.66; ). Compared with the PFNA group, the time of weight-bearing in the PCCP group was longer than that in the PFNA group (t = −2.23, ). The total incidence of postoperative complications was 7.84% in the PFNA group and 10.64% in the PCCP group, and there was no significant difference between the two groups (). Conclusion. The PFNA and PCCP are both effective measures for the clinical treatment of intertrochanteric fractures, and internal fixation should be reasonably selected according to the specific conditions of the patients.

中文翻译：

---

PFNA与PCCP治疗股骨粗隆间骨折疗效比较


客观的。比较分析股骨近端防旋髓内钉（PFNA）与经皮加压接骨板（PCCP）微创治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效。方法。回顾性分析2019年1月至2020年12月我院收治的98例股骨粗隆间骨折患者为研究对象，根据治疗方法不同分为PFNA组和PCCP组，分别为51例和47例。比较两组患者术中及术后各项指标。结果。两组手术时间、术后骨折愈合时间、髋关节功能Harris评分差异无统计学意义（ t =-1.43、1.86、1.63； ）。与 PFNA 组相比，PCCP 组术中出血量和术后引流量均低于 PFNA 组（ t = 11.38、9.66； ）。与PFNA组相比，PCCP组的负重时间长于PFNA组（ t =-2.23， ）。 PFNA组术后并发症总发生率为7.84%，10.PCCP组为64%，两组之间无显着差异（ ）。结论。 PFNA和PCCP都是临床治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的有效措施，应根据患者具体情况合理选择内固定方式。