# Subcapital Femoral Neck Fracture Despite Cement-Augmented Cephalomedullary Nail Fixation for an Osteoporotic Intertrochanteric Fracture: A Case Report and Position- and Sliding-Based Decision Guide

**Authors:** Suguru Yokoo, Yukimasa Okada, Kyotaro Ohno, Takahiko Ichikawa, Chuji Terada, Keiya Yamana

PMC · DOI: 10.3390/clinpract16010001 · Clinics and Practice · 2025-12-22

## TL;DR

A case report shows that even with cement augmentation, improper implant positioning can lead to a femoral neck fracture in an elderly patient with osteoporosis.

## Contribution

Proposes a position- and sliding-based decision guide for clinical use, based on a single case.

## Key findings

- Cement augmentation did not prevent mechanical failure due to suboptimal implant position or load transfer.
- Progressive varus and shortening of TAD/CalTAD were observed, leading to a subcapital femoral neck fracture.
- Accurate implant positioning and preservation of sliding capacity are critical to prevent failure.

## Abstract

Background/Objectives: Cement augmentation of cephalomedullary head elements can improve the purchase of osteoporotic bone; however, it does not eliminate the need for accurate implant positioning or the preservation of sliding. We report the case of an 87-year-old woman who underwent intramedullary nailing with a cement-augmented helical blade for intertrochanteric fracture. Methods: This is a single-patient case report. Calibrated radiographic measurements—tip–apex distance (TAD), calcar-referenced TAD (CalTAD), neck–shaft angle (NSA), and telescoping—were obtained immediately postoperatively and at 4, 7, 12, and 15 months. CT was performed at postoperative week 1 and at failure, and MRI was performed for clinical deterioration. In addition, a targeted narrative review summarizes the evidence on the head-element position, sliding behavior, reduction alignment, and augmentation. Results: Immediate postoperative indices were within the accepted targets: TAD 22.6 mm, CalTAD 22.8 mm, NSA 134°, with the head element inferior on the anteroposterior view and central on the lateral view. Rehabilitation proceeded with full weight bearing as tolerated. Early telescoping was minimal (3.8–3.9 mm). Between 7 and 15 months, progressive varus with shortening of TAD/CalTAD and little additional telescoping was observed, radiographically consistent with relative proximal migration of the head–cement complex and a cleavage plane along the inferior cement mantle, culminating in a subcapital femoral neck fracture with the implant in situ. Emphasis should be placed on accurate implant positioning and preservation of sliding capacity, because cement augmentation alone may not prevent mechanical failure when the implant position or load transfer is suboptimal. Conclusions: Cement augmentation stiffens the interface and reduces micromotion but does not neutralize malposition-induced stresses. Accurate positioning, preservation of sliding, and timely conversion when sliding fails to progress are advisable; these findings are hypothesis-generating from a single case. We propose a position- and sliding-based decision guide to support clinical decision-making; its usefulness remains to be validated in larger studies.

## Linked entities

- **Diseases:** osteoporosis (MONDO:0005298)

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** Femoral Neck Fracture (MESH:D005265), varus (MESH:D060905), Intertrochanteric Fracture (MESH:D006620), Osteoporotic (MESH:D058866)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12839671/full.md

## Figures

8 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12839671/full.md

## References

27 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12839671/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12839671