M Liebergall1, R Mosheiff, O Safran, A Peyser, D Segal. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical School, Hadassah University Hospital, PO Box 12000, Jerusalem 91120, Israel. iril@netvision.net.il
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between mechanism of injury, type of femoral fracture and type of acetabular fracture in floating hip injury. DESIGN: Historical retrospective. PATIENTS: Twenty consecutive patients who sustained a floating hip injury, i.e. simultaneous ipsilateral fracture of the acetabulum and the femur. INTERVENTION: Statistical analysis of the correlation between the mechanism of injury and fracture type. RESULTS: Two main patterns of floating hip injury were observed. The first is the posterior type, which occurs due to a longitudinal force along the femur that causes first, a posterior type fracture of the acetabulum and thereafter, a midshaft femoral fracture. The second pattern is the central type, caused by a lateral blow to the greater trochanter, which then causes a central fracture-dislocation of the acetabulum and a proximal fracture of the femur. CONCLUSIONS: This observation explains the biomechanical nature of this injury and has treatment related implications.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between mechanism of injury, type of femoral fracture and type of acetabular fracture in floating hip injury. DESIGN: Historical retrospective. PATIENTS: Twenty consecutive patients who sustained a floating hip injury, i.e. simultaneous ipsilateral fracture of the acetabulum and the femur. INTERVENTION: Statistical analysis of the correlation between the mechanism of injury and fracture type. RESULTS: Two main patterns of floating hip injury were observed. The first is the posterior type, which occurs due to a longitudinal force along the femur that causes first, a posterior type fracture of the acetabulum and thereafter, a midshaft femoral fracture. The second pattern is the central type, caused by a lateral blow to the greater trochanter, which then causes a central fracture-dislocation of the acetabulum and a proximal fracture of the femur. CONCLUSIONS: This observation explains the biomechanical nature of this injury and has treatment related implications.