The clinical evidence behind the current implants used for proximal femoral fractures is weak considering the number of implants used worldwide .
Sporadic evaluation is not sufficient to identify long term problems .
INTRODUCTION Evaluation of the long-term performance of  implants used in trauma surgery relies on post-marked clinical studies since no registry based implant assessment exists .
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the evidence of performance of implants  currently used for treating proximal femoral fractures ( PFF ) in Denmark .
Functional comparison of the dynamic hip screw and the Gamma locking nail in trochanteric hip fractures: a matched-pair study of 268 patients
The aim of this prospect i ve matched-pair ( age , sex , fracture type , residential status , and walking ability at fracture ) study was to analyse the short-term outcome after Gamma nail ( GN ) and dynamic hip screw ( DHS ) fixation , focusing especially on functional aspects ( St and ardised Audit of Hip Fractures in Europe [ SAHFE ] hip fracture follow-up forms ) , reoperations , and mortality .  Both groups consisted of 134 patients .  DHS and GN groups did not differ significantly with respect to location of residence at 4 months or returning to the prefracture dwelling ( 78 % vs. 73 % , P = 0.224 ) . The change in walking ability at 4 months compared to prefracture situation was better in the DHS group ( p = 0.042 ) , although there was no difference in the change of use of walking aids . The frequency of reoperations during the first year was somewhat lower in the DHS group ( 8.2 % vs. 12.7 % , p = 0.318 ) . Mortality was lower in the DHS group both at 4 months ( 6.0 % vs. 13.4 % , p = 0.061 ) and 12 months ( 14.9 % vs. 23.9 % , p = 0.044 ) . Although walking ability was better and mortality lower in the DHS group , both methods are useful in the treatment of trochanteric femoral fractures . RésuméLe but de cette étude prospect i ve est de comparer et d’analyser le devenir à long terme des fractures du col fémoral traitées par clou Gamma ( GN ) ou par le vis plaque ( DHS ) , notamment en ce qui concerne leurs aspects fonctionnels , les ré interventions et la mortalité .  Deux groupes de 134 patients ont été comparés . Il n’y a pas de différence significative entre ces deux groupes à 4 mois en ce qui concerne le retour aux activités pré-opératoires ( 78 % vs. 73 % , P = 0.224 ) entre DHS et GN . Néanmoins , la marche à 4 mois est bien meilleure dans le groupe DHS ( p = 0.042 ) , il n’y a pas de différence en ce qui concerne l’utilisation d’aide à la marche , moins de ré interventions dans le groupe DHS ( 8,2 % vs. 12,7 % , p = 0.318 ) , de même en ce qui concerne la mortalité ( 6,0 % vs. 13,4 % , p = 0.061 ) et à 12 mois ( 14,9 % vs 23,9 % , p = 0.044 ) . Ces deux méthodes sont utiles dans le traitement des fractures cervico trochantériennes , néanmoins , l’amélioration de la marche et la mortalité sont bien meilleures dans le groupe GHS que dans le groupe clou gamma
The clinical evidence behind the current implants used for proximal femoral fractures is weak considering the number of implants used worldwide .
Sporadic evaluation is not sufficient to identify long term problems .
INTRODUCTION Evaluation of the long-term performance of  implants used in trauma surgery relies on post-marked clinical studies since no registry based implant assessment exists .
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the evidence of performance of implants  currently used for treating proximal femoral fractures ( PFF ) in Denmark .