PURPOSE: This study was performed to compare the results between PFNA (Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation) and PFN (Proximal Femoral Nail) in the treatment of peritrochanteric fracture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patient group with PFNA (n=24, group I) was taken from operations between February, 2007, and March, 2008, whereas the PFN patient group (n=24, group II) were taken from January, 2005, to January, 2007. Both groups were carefully compared with regard to operation time, estimated blood loss, amount of transfusion, ICU care, amount of drainage, average duration of admission, intra- and postoperative complications, radiologic union, Tip Apex Distance (TAD), the change of neck shaft angle, the sliding length of lag screw, Jensen's functional score, and Paker and Palmer's mobility score. RESULTS: The results of our study showed statistical (P<0.05) advantages of PFNA over PFN where estimated blood loss, amount of drainage, rate of complication, neck and shaft angle, and sliding length were concerned. However, there was no statistical significance between the two groups regarding the other areas that were examined (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: PFNA appears to be more effective than PFN for the treatment of peritrochanteric fractures of the proximal femur.