Literature DB >> 14996872

Intraoperative fracture of the femur in revision total hip arthroplasty with a diaphyseal fitting stem.

R M Dominic Meek1, Donald S Garbuz, Bassam A Masri, Nelson V Greidanus, Clive P Duncan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In revision total hip arthroplasty, intraoperative split fractures and cortical perforation fractures are becoming a more common concern with the increasing use of diaphyseal fitting cementless stems. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the risk factors and frequency of intraoperative fractures with the use of these stems and their effect on radiographic and functional outcomes.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective case-control study of 211 consecutive patients who had undergone revision hip arthroplasty with a diaphyseal fitting cementless stem between December 1998 and March 2002. Sixty-four patients sustained an intraoperative fracture of the femur. One hundred and fifteen patients were followed for a minimum of two years; function was analyzed with self-administered outcome questionnaires, and radiographs were evaluated for evidence of bone ingrowth into the femoral stem.
RESULTS: Risk factors associated with an intraoperative fracture were a substantial degree of preoperative bone loss, a low femoral cortex-to-canal ratio, underreaming of the cortex, and the use of a large-diameter stem. The majority of the diaphyseal undisplaced linear fractures occurred at the distal end of an extended trochanteric osteotomy during stem insertion. Fracture due to cortical perforation occurred most often during cement removal. These intraoperative fractures had no significant effect on the functional outcome or radiographic evidence of bone ingrowth.
CONCLUSIONS: There was a surprisingly high rate of intraoperative femoral fractures associated with the use of a diaphyseal fitting stem in revision total hip arthroplasty. Identification of risk factors such as preoperative bone loss and a low cortex-to-canal ratio may permit planning to avoid such fractures. However, the final functional and radiographic outcomes appear to have been unaffected by the fracture when it had been managed appropriately. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, Level II-1 (retrospective cohort study). See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14996872     DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200403000-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  26 in total

1.  Case report: Cementless stem stabilization after intraoperative fracture: a radiostereometric analysis.

Authors:  David Campbell; Graham Mercer; Kjell G Nilsson; Stuart A Callary
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-09-17       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Femoral revision hip arthroplasty: a comparison of two stem designs.

Authors:  Corey J Richards; Clive P Duncan; Bassam A Masri; Donald S Garbuz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Increase of cortical bone after a cementless long stem in periprosthetic fractures.

Authors:  Eduardo García-Rey; Eduardo García-Cimbrelo; Ana Cruz-Pardos; Rosário Madero
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  A valuable technique for femoral stem revision in total hip replacement: The in-cement revision - A case series and technical note.

Authors:  C J McDougall; J Yu; K Calligeros; R Crawford; C R Howie
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2016-07-01

Review 5.  Extended trochanteric osteotomy: current concepts review.

Authors:  Senthil Nathan Sambandam; Gopinath Duraisamy; Jayadev Chandrasekharan; Varatharaj Mounasamy
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2016-02-29

6.  Revision total hip arthroplasty using a cementless tapered revision stem in patients with a mean age of 82 years.

Authors:  Daniel Neumann; Lothar Dueckelmann; Christoph Thaler; Ulrich Dorn
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-10-26       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Risk factors for revision of hip arthroplasties in patients younger than 30 years.

Authors:  Julien Girard; Christophe Glorion; François Bonnomet; Damien Fron; Henri Migaud
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-11-18       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  The threshold force required for femoral impaction grafting in revision hip surgery.

Authors:  Olivia M Flannery; John R Britton; Peter O'Reilly; Nicholas Mahony; Patrick J Prendergast; Paddy J Kenny
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 3.717

9.  Modular tapered implants for severe femoral bone loss in THA: reliable osseointegration but frequent complications.

Authors:  Nicholas M Brown; Matthew Tetreault; Cara A Cipriano; Craig J Della Valle; Wayne Paprosky; Scott Sporer
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  [Two-stage procedure to exchange septic total hip arthroplasties with late periprosthetic infection. Early results after implantation of a reverse modular hybrid endoprosthesis].

Authors:  G Walter; M Bühler; R Hoffmann
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 1.000

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.