Literature DB >> 16757753

Three hundred and twenty-one periprosthetic femoral fractures.

Hans Lindahl1, Göran Garellick, Hans Regnér, Peter Herberts, Henrik Malchau.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the demographics, incidence, and results of treatment of periprosthetic fractures in a nationwide observational study.
METHODS: In the years 1999 and 2000, 321 periprosthetic fractures were reported to the Swedish National Hip Arthroplasty Register. All of the associated hospital records were collected. At the time of follow-up, the Harris hip score, a health-related quality-of-life measure (the EuroQol-5D [EQ-5D] index), and patient satisfaction were used as outcome measurements. A radiologist performed the radiographic evaluation.
RESULTS: Ninety-one patients, with a mean age of 73.8 years, sustained a fracture after one or several revision procedures, and 230 patients, with a mean age of 77.9 years, sustained a fracture after a primary total hip replacement. Minor trauma, including a fall to the floor, and a spontaneous fracture were the main etiologies for the injuries. A high number of patients had a loose stem at the time of the fracture (66% in the primary replacement group and 51% in the revision group). Eighty-eight percent of the fractures were classified as Vancouver type B; however, there was difficulty with preoperative categorization of the fractures radiographically. There was a high failure rate resulting in a low short to mid-term prosthetic survival rate. The sixty-six-month survival rate for the entire fracture group, with reoperation as the end point, was 74.8% +/- 5.0%. One factor associated with fracture risk was implant design.
CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of these findings, we believe that high-risk patients should have routine radiographic follow-up. Such a routine could identify a loose implant and make intervention possible before a fracture occurred. Furthermore, we recommend an exploration of the joint to test the stability of the implant in patients with a Vancouver type-B fracture in which the stability of the stem is uncertain.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16757753     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.E.00457

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


  71 in total

1.  The locking attachment plate for proximal fixation of periprosthetic femur fractures--a biomechanical comparison of two techniques.

Authors:  Mark Lenz; Markus Windolf; Thomas Mückley; Gunther O Hofmann; Michael Wagner; Robert G Richards; Karsten Schwieger; Boyko Gueorguiev
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2012-05-27       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 2.  In brief: classifications in brief: Vancouver classification of postoperative periprosthetic femur fractures.

Authors:  Greg E Gaski; Sean P Scully
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Periprosthetic femoral fracture as cause of early revision after short stem hip arthroplasty-a multicentric analysis.

Authors:  Sang-Min Kim; Seung-Beom Han; Kee Hyung Rhyu; Jeong Joon Yoo; Kwang-Jun Oh; Je Hyun Yoo; Kyung-Jae Lee; Seung-Jae Lim
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Short-term recovery of balance control after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Vipul Lugade; Virginia Klausmeier; Brian Jewett; Dennis Collis; Li-Shan Chou
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 5.  Surgical treatment options in patients with impaired bone quality.

Authors:  Norman A Johanson; Jody Litrenta; Jay M Zampini; Frederic Kleinbart; Haviva M Goldman
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  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

Review 7.  Prophylactic augmentation of the osteoporotic proximal femur-mission impossible?

Authors:  Peter Varga; Ladina Hofmann-Fliri; Michael Blauth; Markus Windolf
Journal:  Bonekey Rep       Date:  2016-12-07

8.  Plate failure following plate osteosynthesis in periprosthetic femoral fractures.

Authors:  Sandra Boesmueller; Sebastian F Baumbach; Marcus Hofbauer; Gerald E Wozasek
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 1.704

9.  Are Nucleated Cell Counts Useful in the Diagnosis of Infection in Periprosthetic Fracture?

Authors:  Stephen Preston; Lyndsay Somerville; Brent Lanting; James Howard
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Periprosthetic femur fractures treated with modular fluted, tapered stems.

Authors:  Matthew P Abdel; David G Lewallen; Daniel J Berry
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.