Skip to content

Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation™ (PFNA) Versus Gamma Nail 3™ (Gamma3) for Intramedullary Nailing of Unstable Trochanteric Fractures

Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation™ (PFNA) Versus Gamma Nail 3™ (Gamma3) for Intramedullary Nailing of Unstable Trochanteric Fractures - a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00736684
Acronym
PROGAINT-ES
Enrollment
440
Registered
2008-08-18
Start date
2007-11-30
Completion date
2010-09-30
Last updated
2011-02-11

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Unstable Trochanteric Fractures

Keywords

Femoral fractures [MeSH], hip fractures [MeSH], trochanteric fractures (femoral neck fractures [MeSH]), intramedullary nailing (fracture fixation, intramedullary [MeSH]), complex femoral fractures, femoral nail, surgical treatment (surgical procedures, operative [MeSH]), complications

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to compare rates of any fracture fixation complication and revision rates after intramedullary fixation of unstable trochanteric fractures between the Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation™ (PFNA)(Investigational Group) and Gamma Nail 3™ (Gamma3) (Control Group).

Detailed description

Intramedullary nailing of unstable per- and subtrochanteric femoral fractures is a standard procedure in trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Unstable fractures treated with intramedullary nailing carry the risk of fracture fixation complications. The PFNA (Synthes) has evolved from the original PFN design, featuring a novel antirotation screw. Apart from the prevention of excess rotational forces, this supporting element may enhance the overall stability of the construct, thus potentially reducing fracture fixation complications. Empirical information about the fracture fixation complication rates of the PFNA device is not available. The primary objective of this study is to compare the 1-year fracture fixation rates between the PFNA and Gamma Nail 3™ (Stryker). Secondary objectives of the study are to compare differences in functional outcomes, quality of life outcomes, safety, radiological outcomes, handling and perceived effectiveness between the devices.

Interventions

DEVICEProximal Femoral Nail AntirotationTM (PFNA)

intramedullary nailing

DEVICEGamma Nail 3TM (Gamma3)

intramedullary nailing

Sponsors

Synthes Inc.
CollaboratorINDUSTRY
AO Clinical Investigation and Publishing Documentation
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
55 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Age 55 years and more * Patients with isolated, unstable, closed or type 1 open trochanteric fractures, classified as AO 31-A2 or AO 31-A3 * Definitive primary fracture treatment with PFNA or Gamma3 (defined inTable 1) within three days after the index event * Signed written informed consent (by the subjects or legal guardian) and agreement to attend the planned follow-ups

Exclusion criteria

* Pathologic fracture of any other cause than osteoporosis * Patients or legal guardian refusing to sign the informed consent form * Multiple trauma * Type 2 and 3 open fractures * Drug or alcohol abuse * Wound and/or bone healing disorders of any other cause than diabetes mellitus or smoking * Active malignancy * Expected life expectancy ≤ 3 months * Inability to walk independently prior to injury event (use of one stick is allowed. Not meeting inclusion criteria are bedridden, wheel-chair ridden and walker dependent subjects) * Neurological and psychiatric disorders that would preclude reliable assessment (eg,, Parkinson disease, Multiple sclerosis, severe depression) * Rheumatoid arthritis

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Any fracture fixation complication.One year

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Bone union/fusion as evaluated by CT-scanning, health-related quality of life, disease-specific functional scoring, activities of daily living, mortality, radiological parameters, surgery details and surgeons' evaluation of handling and effectiveness.One year

Countries

Spain

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026