Literature DB >> 21176899

Management and outcome of interprosthetic femoral fractures.

Patrick Platzer1, Rupert Schuster, Monika Luxl, Harald Kurt Widhalm, Stefan Eipeldauer, Irena Krusche-Mandl, Roman Ostermann, Beate Blutsch, Vilmos Vécsei.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Interprosthetic femoral fractures following ipsilateral hip and knee arthroplasty are a rare but serious complication in clinical practice. In most cases, adequate management of these injuries might constitute a challenging problem. However, the literature provides only few data regarding the treatment and outcome of interprosthetic femoral fractures, and there are only few classifications available, which might assist in finding an appropriate treatment concept. The purpose of this study was to analyse our experience in the management of interprosthetic femoral fractures following ipsilateral hip and knee joint replacement.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the clinical and radiographic records of 23 patients (15 female and eight male, average age: 79.2 years) with an interprosthetic fracture after ipsilateral hip and knee joint replacement between 1992 and 2008. For the classification of interprosthetic femoral fractures, the fractures were divided into three types, depending on the fracture site and the adjacency to the prostheses. All patients underwent operative stabilisation, either by lateral plate fixation (n=19), by revision arthroplasty using a long stem (n=2) or by plate fixation and revision arthroplasty (n=2).
RESULTS: Referring to the clinical outcome, 16 patients returned to their pre-injury activity level and were satisfied with their clinical outcome. In six patients, we saw a relevant decrease of hip or knee function and severe limitations in gait and activities of daily living. We had a mean Harris Hip Score (HHS) of 78.4 points, and a mean Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) of 71.8 points. Relating to the radiographic outcome, successful fracture healing was achieved in 19 of 22 patients (86%) within 6 months. Failures of reduction and fixation were noted in four (18%) of 22 patients.
CONCLUSION: We had a satisfactory outcome following individualised treatment of interprosthetic femoral fractures following ipsilateral hip and knee joint replacement. Compared to the rare data in current literature, we had promising functional result and high rate of bony fusion. Regarding the complexity and challenges in many of these cases, interprosthetic fractures require an adequate analysis of the fracture aetiology and a suitable transfer into the best possible treatment concept.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21176899     DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.08.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Injury        ISSN: 0020-1383            Impact factor:   2.586


  11 in total

1.  The Baba classification focused on implant designs is useful in setting the therapeutic strategy for interprosthetic femoral fracture.

Authors:  Tomonori Baba; Kazuo Kaneko; Yasuhiro Homma; Hironori Ochi; Yu Ozaki; Taiji Watari; Mikio Matsumoto
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2017-09-27

2.  Reliability of the commonly used classification systems for interprosthetic fractures.

Authors:  Toby Jennison; Abdulla Jawed; Ahmed ElBakoury; Hazem Hosny; Rathan Yarlagadda
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2019-03-18

Review 3.  Periprosthetic fractures: epidemiology and current treatment.

Authors:  Antonio Capone; Stefano Congia; Roberto Civinini; Giuseppe Marongiu
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2017-10-25

Review 4.  [Ipsilateral THA after stemmed TKA: Risk of interprosthetic fracture?].

Authors:  J Dexel; A Hartmann; J Pyrc; K-P Günther; J Lützner
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 5.  A systematic review of the surgical outcomes of interprosthetic femur fractures.

Authors:  Brian M Rao; Phillip Stokey; Mina Tanios; Jiayong Liu; Nabil A Ebraheim
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2022-07-31

6.  Classifications in Brief: Pires Classification of Interprosthetic Femur Fractures.

Authors:  Rohan A Gheewala; Joseph R Young
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 4.755

7.  Interposition sleeve as treatment option for interprosthetic fractures of the femur: a biomechanical in vitro assessment.

Authors:  Lukas Weiser; Michal A Korecki; Kay Sellenschloh; Florian Fensky; Klaus Püschel; Michael M Morlock; Johannes M Rueger; Wolfgang Lehmann
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-04-26       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Incidence of and risk factors for femoral fractures in the gap between hip and knee implants.

Authors:  José Antonio Valle Cruz; Antonio Luis Urda; Laura Serrano; Francisco Alberto Rodriguez-Gonzalez; Julio Otero; Enrique Moro; Luis López-Durán
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Interprosthetic femoral fractures treated with locking plate.

Authors:  Nabil Ebraheim; Trevor Carroll; Muhammad Z Moral; Justin Lea; Adam Hirschfeld; Jiayong Liu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-07-12       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Interprosthetic Femoral Fractures Surgical Treatment in Geriatric Patients.

Authors:  Marios Loucas; Rafael Loucas; Nico Safa Akhavan; Patrick Fries; Michael Dietrich
Journal:  Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil       Date:  2021-05-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.