Trauma

Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) for Intertrochanteric Fracture

Comprehensive surgical technique guide for dynamic hip screw fixation of intertrochanteric femur fractures for FRCS exam preparation

Core Procedure
intermediate
By OrthoVellum Medical Education Team

Reviewed by OrthoVellum Editorial Team

Editorial maintenance, source checking, and correction workflow • Published by OrthoVellum Medical Education Team

High Yield Overview

DYNAMIC HIP SCREW (DHS) FOR INTERTROCHANTERIC FRACTURE

Direct Lateral Approach | Core Trauma Procedure

Mnemonic

TADTAD - Tip-Apex Distance Calculation

Mnemonic

STABLESTABLE - DHS Indication Criteria

Critical Danger Structures

Perforating Vessels

Branches from profunda femoris traverse vastus lateralis from posterior to anterior. Location: Throughout vastus muscle belly. Protection: Careful vastus splitting with coagulation of perforators as encountered.

Superior Gluteal Nerve

Motor supply to gluteus medius/minimus. Location: 3-5cm proximal to greater trochanter tip (safe zone below GT). Protection: Limit proximal dissection, avoid retractors above GT.

Sciatic Nerve

Major nerve posterior to hip. Location: 5cm posterior to greater trochanter, emerges below piriformis. Protection: No posterior retractor placement, avoid posterior dissection.

Femoral Vessels

Femoral artery and vein anteriorly. Location: Femoral triangle, anteromedial to femur. Protection: Strictly lateral approach, no anterior dissection beyond femoral shaft.

Primary Indications

Absolute Indications:

  • Stable intertrochanteric fractures (AO/OTA 31-A1) - the ideal DHS fracture pattern
  • Simple pertrochanteric fractures (AO/OTA 31-A2.1) with intact medial cortex and lateral wall
  • Lateral wall thickness >20mm on pre-reduction imaging (Palm criteria)
  • Basicervical femoral neck fractures in elderly with osteoporotic bone (selected cases)

Relative Indications:

  • Selected A2.2 patterns with reconstructable medial cortex
  • Patients where intramedullary device contraindicated (severe femoral bowing, narrow canal)
  • Surgeon expertise with DHS for borderline patterns

Australian Context:

  • ANZHFR 2023: 48% of intertrochanteric fractures receive DHS, 52% receive cephalomedullary nail
  • Medicare MBS item 47528: Internal fixation of intertrochanteric fracture - $1,247.55
  • LMWH or DOAC for VTE prophylaxis (enoxaparin 40mg daily or rivaroxaban 10mg daily for 35 days)

Contraindications

Absolute Contraindications:

  • Reverse obliquity patterns (AO 31-A3) - fracture line runs superomedial to inferolateral, DHS cannot resist varus collapse
  • Lateral wall thickness <20mm or comminuted - lateral wall required for barrel plate stability
  • Subtrochanteric extension - DHS cannot control long lever arm of distal fragment
  • Pathological fractures with metastatic bone disease - inadequate bone for screw purchase

Relative Contraindications:

  • Severe osteoporosis with eggshell cortex - high cut-out risk
  • Combined neck-shaft fractures - complex pattern better suited to reconstruction nail
  • Fracture in young patient (<50 years) - consider anatomic reduction ORIF if fit for longer surgery
  • Morbid obesity (BMI >40) - increased mechanical demands

Equipment and Setup

Fracture Table Setup:

  • Radiolucent fracture table (Maquet, Hana, or similar)
  • Boot traction attachment for affected limb
  • Well-padded perineal post (lateral to genitals to avoid pudendal nerve)
  • Unaffected leg in hemilithotomy or extended and abducted

C-arm Positioning:

  • C-arm enters from contralateral side, between patient's legs
  • Must obtain clear AP and lateral views of hip and proximal femur
  • Confirm imaging BEFORE prepping patient

Instrumentation:

  • DHS instrument set with guide wire, triple reamer, tap
  • 135° and 150° angle guide/jig
  • Lag screws (85-105mm range)
  • 4-hole barrel plate (135° or 150°)
  • Cortical screws (32-44mm typical)
  • Depth gauge, calibrated measuring device

Reduction Aids:

  • Schanz pin for joystick manipulation if needed
  • Bone hooks, ball spike pusher
  • Traction table controls for length and rotation

Operative Technique

Step 1: Anaesthesia and Positioning

Patient under general or spinal anaesthesia on fracture table. Affected leg in traction boot with longitudinal traction applied. Internal rotation 10-15 degrees to correct typical external rotation deformity of distal fragment. Perineal post well-padded and positioned lateral to genitals. Contralateral leg abducted in hemilithotomy or extended. Confirm C-arm can obtain clear AP and lateral views.

Exam Pearl

Exam Key: "I use a fracture table with the patient supine. Longitudinal traction corrects shortening, and internal rotation 10-15 degrees corrects the external rotation deformity of the distal fragment. The perineal post is well-padded and positioned lateral to the genitals to prevent pudendal nerve compression."

Step 2: Closed Reduction

Apply gentle longitudinal traction and internal rotation. Check reduction on AP and lateral C-arm views. ACCEPTABLE REDUCTION CRITERIA:

  • Anatomic or slight valgus alignment (5-10 degrees)
  • Restoration of medial cortical continuity (CRITICAL for DHS)
  • No posterior sag on lateral view
  • Normal or slightly increased neck-shaft angle (125-135 degrees)

If closed reduction inadequate, use Schanz pin joystick in greater trochanter to manipulate proximal fragment. Accept reduction before proceeding.

Exam Pearl

Exam Key: "I accept anatomic or slight valgus alignment with restoration of medial cortical support - this is CRITICAL as DHS is a load-bearing device. Varus malalignment is biomechanically doomed to failure. I verify no posterior sag on lateral view."

Reduction Pitfalls

  • Varus malalignment is NEVER acceptable - causes DHS failure
  • Persistent posterior sag leads to apex posterior deformity
  • Over-distraction prevents impaction and healing
  • Loss of medial cortical contact removes weight-bearing support

Step 3: Incision and Superficial Dissection

Palpate greater trochanter. Make longitudinal incision 8-12cm centred just distal to GT, extending along lateral femoral shaft. Incise skin and subcutaneous tissue. Identify and incise fascia lata (iliotibial band) in line with skin incision. Retract to expose vastus lateralis muscle.

Exam Pearl

Exam Key: "Direct lateral approach with 8-12cm incision starting just below the greater trochanter tip extending distally. I incise through fascia lata to expose vastus lateralis."

Step 4: Deep Dissection

Two options for vastus lateralis:

  1. Split along muscle fibres (less bleeding)
  2. Elevate anteriorly off lateral intermuscular septum

Expose lateral femoral cortex for plate length required. Identify and coagulate perforating vessels from profunda femoris as encountered. Clear periosteum only where plate will sit.

Deep Dissection Dangers

  • Perforating vessels cause significant bleeding if not controlled
  • Excessive periosteal stripping devascularises bone
  • Posterior dissection risks profunda femoris vessels

Step 5: Guide Wire Insertion

Attach angle guide (135° standard) to lateral femoral cortex at level of lesser trochanter. Entry point: junction of proximal and middle thirds of femur, at or just above lesser trochanter level. Advance guide wire under fluoroscopy toward femoral head.

TARGET POSITION:

  • Centre-centre OR inferior-centre on BOTH AP and lateral views
  • NEVER superior - increases cut-out 3-4 fold

Advance wire to within 5-10mm of subchondral bone. Measure and calculate Tip-Apex Distance.

Exam Pearl

Exam Key: "I insert the guide wire through a 135-degree angle guide, aiming for centre-centre or inferior-centre position in the femoral head on BOTH AP and lateral views. Superior position is NEVER acceptable as it increases cut-out risk 3-4 fold. I calculate TAD at this point."

Step 6: Triple Reaming

Perform triple reaming over guide wire to measured depth (5-10mm short of subchondral bone). Triple reaming creates smooth channel allowing:

  • Easy lag screw insertion
  • Lag screw sliding for dynamic compression

Irrigate during reaming to prevent thermal necrosis. Confirm depth with gauge.

Step 7: Lag Screw Insertion

Select lag screw length based on measurement (typically 85-100mm). Insert over guide wire through reamed channel. Advance to within 5-10mm of subchondral bone. CONFIRM:

  • Centre-centre or inferior-centre position on AP and lateral
  • Calculate final TAD - MUST be <25mm

Exam Pearl

Exam Key: "I insert the lag screw to within 5-10mm of subchondral bone with optimal position being centre-centre or inferior-centre. I calculate and document Tip-Apex Distance which MUST be less than 25mm - this is the single most important predictor of DHS success. TAD greater than 25mm is unacceptable and requires repositioning."

Step 8: Barrel Plate Application

Slide barrel plate over lag screw. Seat plate FLUSH against lateral femoral cortex - must not be proud. Ensure plate aligned with femoral shaft axis without flexion/extension or rotation. Apply provisional fixation with one distal cortical screw.

Step 9: Screw Fixation

Insert cortical screws through remaining plate holes achieving bicortical purchase. Minimum 4 cortices of fixation distally (2 screws x 2 cortices). Consider anti-rotation screw in proximal hole above barrel for added rotational stability. Confirm all screws bicortical on fluoroscopy.

Step 10: Compression and Final Check

Remove guide wire. Apply compression through barrel plate mechanism to engage dynamic lag effect. COMPREHENSIVE FINAL CHECK:

  1. Reduction maintained (valgus acceptable, medial cortex intact)
  2. Lag screw centre-centre or inferior-centre
  3. TAD <25mm documented
  4. Screw 5-10mm from subchondral bone, no joint penetration
  5. Plate flush on lateral cortex
  6. All screws bicortical
  7. Rotation and length correct (compare to contralateral)

Release traction gradually and observe for stability.

Critical Final Check Items

  • TAD >25mm requires repositioning - do NOT accept
  • Joint penetration requires screw exchange
  • Unrecognised malrotation causes functional impairment
  • Persistent varus predicts failure

Step 11: Closure

Copious irrigation with saline. Meticulous haemostasis. Consider drain for high-risk patients (anticoagulation, large haematoma). Repair vastus lateralis. Close fascia lata with strong absorbable suture (0 or 1 Vicryl) - provides soft tissue coverage of implant. Subcutaneous closure with 2-0 absorbable. Skin with staples or subcuticular suture. Sterile dressing.

Post-operative Care

Immediate Post-operative:

  • DVT prophylaxis: LMWH or NOAC (Australian standard: enoxaparin 40mg daily or rivaroxaban 10mg daily for 14-35 days)
  • Tranexamic acid reduces transfusion requirement
  • Orthogeriatric co-management for medical optimisation

Mobilisation Protocol:

  • Weight-bearing as tolerated (WBAT) from Day 1 for stable fixation
  • Sit out of bed Day 0-1
  • Stand with frame Day 1
  • Physiotherapy for gait training, transfers, ROM

Follow-up:

  • Radiographs at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks
  • Monitor for cut-out (typically occurs within first 3 months)
  • Fracture union expected 8-12 weeks

Hardware Removal:

  • Not routinely required
  • Consider if symptomatic (lateral thigh pain, trochanteric bursitis)

Complications

DHS Complications: Recognition, Prevention, and Management

Exam Viva Scenarios

Practice these scenarios to excel in your viva examination

VIVA SCENARIOStandard

EXAMINER

"An 82-year-old woman falls at home and presents with a shortened, externally rotated right leg. X-rays show an intertrochanteric fracture. How would you manage her?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
I would manage this elderly patient with a hip fracture using a multidisciplinary approach prioritising early surgery. Initial assessment includes ATLS principles, analgesia with fascia iliaca block, and resuscitation. I would obtain AP pelvis and lateral hip radiographs to classify the fracture using the AO/OTA system. For pre-operative optimisation, I would involve orthogeriatrics for medical optimisation including anticoagulation reversal if needed. Current evidence supports surgery within 36-48 hours as delay beyond this increases mortality by 10% per day. Regarding surgical planning, if this is a stable pattern (A1 or A2.1) with intact lateral wall greater than 20mm and intact medial cortex, I would use a Dynamic Hip Screw. If unstable features are present including reverse obliquity, lateral wall compromise, or subtrochanteric extension, I would use a cephalomedullary nail instead. For DHS technique, I would position the patient supine on a fracture table with traction. My closed reduction target is anatomic or slight valgus with medial cortex contact. I would use a direct lateral approach, insert the lag screw to centre-centre or inferior-centre position with Tip-Apex Distance less than 25mm. Post-operatively, I would mobilise weight-bearing as tolerated from Day 1 with DVT prophylaxis.
VIVA SCENARIOStandard

EXAMINER

"Explain the biomechanical difference between a DHS and a cephalomedullary nail for intertrochanteric fractures."

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
The fundamental difference is that DHS is a LOAD-BEARING device while a cephalomedullary nail is a LOAD-SHARING device. The DHS sits on the lateral femoral cortex and transmits load directly through the implant. This creates a longer moment arm from the mechanical axis of the limb to the plate, generating higher bending forces on the construct. The DHS relies on intact medial cortex to provide compressive support. The lag screw allows controlled sliding for fracture impaction and compression. When medial cortex is intact, the bone bears significant load and the implant provides stability during healing. The cephalomedullary nail sits within the medullary canal, close to the mechanical axis. This creates a shorter moment arm with lower bending forces on the implant. The nail acts as an internal buttress, sharing load with the bone rather than bearing it entirely. The design provides better rotational control and resists varus collapse even without intact medial cortex. Clinical implications are that DHS works excellently for stable patterns where medial cortex is intact, but fails when medial support is absent. The nail is preferred for unstable patterns including reverse obliquity where the fracture line runs from superomedial to inferolateral, lateral wall deficiency less than 20mm, subtrochanteric extension, and significant medial comminution. Evidence from multiple RCTs including the Cochrane review shows equivalent outcomes for stable fractures, but superior outcomes with nailing for unstable patterns.
VIVA SCENARIOStandard

EXAMINER

"At 6-week follow-up, your DHS patient has increasing groin pain and cannot weight-bear. What is your differential and management?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
My primary concern is lag screw cut-out, which is the most common mechanical complication of DHS occurring in 5-15% of cases. My clinical assessment would evaluate pain character and location, ability to weight-bear, limb length and rotation, and neurovascular status. On examination, I would look for limb shortening suggesting implant failure, external rotation deformity, and inability to straight leg raise. Imaging would include AP pelvis and lateral hip radiographs. I would assess for lag screw position change, specifically superolateral migration indicating cut-out. I would look for fracture displacement or collapse, implant failure such as screw breakage or plate pull-off, and signs of infection or AVN. If cut-out is confirmed, management depends on the extent of cut-out and remaining bone stock. For early or partial cut-out with adequate bone stock, revision DHS with longer lag screw in better position may be attempted, though success rates are low. For complete cut-out or poor bone stock, conversion to arthroplasty is indicated. In the elderly, I would typically perform cemented hemiarthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty depending on acetabular status and patient activity level. Prevention is key. TAD greater than 25mm at index surgery has 6-fold higher cut-out rate. Superior screw position increases risk 3-4 fold. Varus malreduction predisposes to failure. This emphasises the importance of meticulous technique at the index procedure.

Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) - Exam Summary

High-Yield Exam Summary

References

  1. Baumgaertner MR, Curtin SL, Lindskog DM, Keggi JM. The value of the tip-apex distance in predicting failure of fixation of peritrochanteric fractures of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77(7):1058-1064.

  2. Palm H, Jacobsen S, Sonne-Holm S, Gebuhr P. Integrity of the lateral femoral wall in intertrochanteric hip fractures: an important predictor of reoperation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(3):470-475.

  3. Parker MJ, Handoll HH. Gamma and other cephalocondylic intramedullary nails versus extramedullary implants for extracapsular hip fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(9):CD000093.

  4. Anglen JO, Weinstein JN. Nail or plate fixation of intertrochanteric hip fractures: changing pattern of practice. A review of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery database. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(4):700-707.

  5. Australian and New Zealand Hip Fracture Registry (ANZHFR). Annual Report 2023. Hip fracture care in Australia and New Zealand.

  6. NICE Guideline NG124. Hip fracture: management. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. 2017 (updated 2023).

  7. Moran CG, Wenn RT, Sikand M, Taylor AM. Early mortality after hip fracture: is delay before surgery important? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(3):483-489.

  8. Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A, et al. The risk and burden of vertebral fractures in Sweden. Osteoporos Int. 2004;15(1):20-26.

  9. Simmermacher RK, Ljungqvist J, Bail H, et al. The new proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) in daily practice: results of a multicentre clinical study. Injury. 2008;39(8):932-939.

  10. Griffin XL, Parsons N, Achten J, et al. Recovery of health-related quality of life in a United Kingdom hip fracture population. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B(3):372-382.