Aim The two most commonly used implants for treatment of trochanteric fractures are the dynamic hip screw (DHS) and proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA). The aim of this study was to evaluate blood loss in patients with trochanteric fracture treated with DHS or PFNA. Methods This retrospective comparative study included 61 patients with trochanteric fracture, who were divided according to a surgical method into DHS and PFNA groups. In the PFNA group, a short third generation gamma-nail was used for osteosynthesis (Supernail GT, Lima Corporate, Italy), and in the DHS group a dynamic hip screw was used (Synthes, Oberdorf, Switzerland). Complete blood count with haemoglobin and haematocrit values was taken preoperatively and on the first day postoperatively and a number of red blood cell transfusions (RBC) were evaluated. Electronic medical records from 2022 were used to collect patient data. Results There were no significant differences in terms of gender and age between the groups (p=0.510 and p=0.087, respectively), as well as in the fracture type distribution (p=0.886). The duration of postoperative hospitalisation was similar between the groups (p=0.643). There was no statistically significant association between the number of RBC transfusions and fixation method (p=0.091), as well as in postoperative haemoglobin and haematocrit levels between the groups (p=0.180 and p=0.225, respectively). Conclusion Both DHS and PFNA implants are safe surgical techniques for the treatment of trochanteric fractures, with similar blood loss, number of blood transfusions and hospital stay.

Aim To determine differences between reviparin and dalteparin treatment in patients with extracapsular hip fractures treated with intramedullary nailing and their effects on perioperative blood loss and early postoperative recovery. Methods Retrospective comparative study included 68 patients with extracapsular hip fracture who were divided into dalteparin and reviparin group. Medical records were used to obtain demographic data, laboratory parameters, haemoglobin and haematocrit levels, platelet count, mortality rate and medical complications. Results Out of total 68 patients, 31 were in reviparin and 37 in dalteparin group. Mean age of patients was 70.5 (±14.4) and 76.8 (±8.4) years in reviparin and dalteparin group, respectively (p=0.071). Median values of haemoglobin levels on the first postoperative day were lower in dalteparin group compared to reviparin group (p=0.012). On the first postoperative day haematocrit values were also lower in dalteparin than in reviparin group (p=0.015). Both groups showed an increase in platelet count on the first postoperative day, but without significant difference (p=0.084). There was no statistically significant difference in intrahospital mortality between the groups (6.4% vs. 2.7%; p=0.588). One case of pulmonary embolism was detected in the dalteparin group. Conclusion Low-molecular-weight heparin is the drug of choice in patients with hip fractures for thromboprophylaxis. Due to non-antithrombin-mediated actions, reviparin and dalteparin could have different effects on perioperative blood loss. Both dalteparin and reviparin are safe and effective agents for thromboprophylaxis in patients with proximal femur fractures.

Introduction. We report a case of a sixty-year-old man diagnosed with gluteal compartment syndrome caused by traumatic rupture of the superior gluteal artery associated with fracture of the inferior pubic ramus and blunt trauma. Case report. A patient was injured falling from a height of four meters. Signs of compartment syndrome and sciatic nerve compression developed three hours after the injury. The patient went through a computerized tomography (CT) scan procedure with contrast, which showed a hematoma in the gluteal region, but without signs of active bleeding. However, after observation and monitoring of the patient, CT angiography was performed which revealed a rupture of the superior gluteal artery. Fasciotomy and debridement were performed and the patient was diagnosed with gluteal compartment syndrome and rupture of the superior gluteal artery. Surgery resulted in a significant improvement of the patient’s condition. Conclusion. Traumatic gluteal compartment syndrome is a rare condition. Gluteal compartment syndrome should be taken into consideration in each patient with pelvic trauma and hematoma in the gluteal region whose neurological status is affected. Prompt diagnosis and fasciotomy are crucial in the treatment and fasciotomy presents the gold standard in the treatment.

Introduction: The basic principle of non-surgical fracture treatment is to restore the original anatomical position of fractured fragments by different techniques, without direct access to the bone and without further traumatizing of tissues. Intramedullary nailing is synthesis and consolidation of fracture fragments with the main goal to gain strength and permanent placement of the implants. Two techniques of intramedullary osteosynthesis are used: with dynamic or with static intramedullary nail. Dynamization include conversion of static nail by removing screws from the longest fragment. Aim: The aim of this study is to determine whether there is a difference in the speed and quality of healing of the type A and B fractures of the femur and tibia treated by static or dynamic intramedullary nails and to compare the results. Material and methods: The study was conducted at the Clinic for Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Clinical Center University Sarajevo from January 2004 to June 2009. The study was retrospective-prospective, manipulative, controlled and it was conducted on a total of 129 patients with closed fractures of the diaphysis of the femur and tibia type A and type B, with different segments of bone, regardless of sex and age structure, with the exception of children under 14 years of age. Results: Precisely there were 47 patients with femoral fractures and 82 patients with tibial fractures. The average number of weeks of healing femoral and tibial fractures was slightly in advantage of static intramedullary osteosynthesis, it was 17.08 weeks (SD=3.382). The average number of weeks of healing in 23 patients with fractures of the femur, treated by dynamic intramedullary osteosynthesis was 17.83 (SD=2.978). We can conclude that static intramedullary nailing osteosynthesis unable movements between fragments which directly stimulates bone formation and formation of minimal callus. Conclusion: Static intramedullary osteosynthesis resolve the problem of stabilizing the fracture, limb shortening and rotation of fragments.

Introduction: Intramedullary nailing is synthesis and  consolidation of fracture fragments with the main goalto gain strength and permanent placement of the implants. Two techniques of intramedullary osteosynthesis are used: with dynamic or with static intramedullary nail. Dynamization include conversion of static nail by removing screws from the longest fragment. The aim of this study is to determine whether there is a difference in the speed and quality of healing of the type A and B fractures of the femur and tibia treated by static or dynamic intramedullary nails and to compare the results.Methods: The study was conducted on a total of 129 patients with closed fractures of the diaphysis of the femur and tibia type A and type B. Patients were divided into two groups, based on the applied operating method, static or dynamic intramedullary osteosynthesis.Results: The average number of weeks of healing femoral and tibial fractures was slightly in advantage of static intramedullary osteosynthesis, it was 17.08 weeks (SD=3.382). The average number of weeks of healing in 23 patients with fractures of the femur, treated by dynamic intramedullary osteosynthesis was 17.83 (SD=2.978).Conclusion: We can conclude that static intramedullary nailing osteosynthesis unable movements between fragments which directly stimulates bone formation and formation of minimal callus. Static intramedullary ostesinthesys resolve the problem of stabilizing the fracture, limb shortening and rotation of fragments.