Literature DB >> 22014657

A biomechanical comparison of periprosthetic femoral fracture fixation in normal and osteoporotic cadaveric bone.

Harry A Demos1, Marcus S Briones, Peter H White, Kathleen A Hogan, William R Barfield.   

Abstract

Several techniques are described for fixation of Vancouver B1 femoral shaft fractures after total hip arthroplasty. Twenty-four femurs were scanned by dual x-ray absorptiometry scanned and matched for bone mineral density. Femurs were implanted with a cemented simulated total hip prosthesis with a simulated periprosthetic femur fracture distal to the stem. Fractures were fixed with Synthes (Paoli, Pa) 12-hole curved plates and 4 different constructs proximally. Each construct was loaded to failure in axial compression. Constructs with locking and nonlocking screws demonstrated equivalent loads at failure and were superior in load at failure compared with cables. Cable constructs failed proximally. No proximal failures occurred in specimens fixed with screws and cables. A combination of locked or nonlocked screws and supplemental cable fixation is recommended for the treatment of Vancouver B1 periprosthetic femur fractures.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22014657     DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.08.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  9 in total

1.  High union rates of locking compression plating with cortical strut allograft for type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures.

Authors:  Ingwon Yeo; Kee-Hyung Rhyu; Sang-Min Kim; Yoon-Soo Park; Seung-Jae Lim
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-01-13       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Biomechanical comparison of two angular stable plate constructions for periprosthetic femur fracture fixation.

Authors:  Dirk Wähnert; Richard Schröder; Martin Schulze; Peter Westerhoff; Michael Raschke; Richard Stange
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Bicortical screw fixation provides superior biomechanical stability but devastating failure modes in periprosthetic femur fracture care using locking plates.

Authors:  Clemens Gwinner; Sven Märdian; Tobias Dröge; Martin Schulze; Michael J Raschke; Richard Stange
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-05-07       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 4.  The management of type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures: when to fix and when to revise.

Authors:  Adam T Yasen; Fares S Haddad
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-12-16       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Clinical and radiological results of patients treated with orthogonal double plating for periprosthetic femoral fractures.

Authors:  Franz Josef Müller; Michael Galler; Bernd Füchtmeier
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-08-12       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 6.  Periprosthetic bone loss: diagnostic and therapeutic approaches.

Authors:  Loredana Cavalli; Maria Luisa Brandi
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2014-06-17

7.  A New System for Periprosthetic Fracture Stabilization-A Biomechanical Comparison.

Authors:  Daniel Rau; Gabriele Rußow; Mark Heyland; Dag Wulsten; Clemens Kösters; Werner Schmölz; Sven Märdian
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-02-08       Impact factor: 4.241

8.  Femur Strength is Similar Before and After Iatrogenic Fracture During Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Biomechanical Analysis.

Authors:  Bailey J Ross; Akshar H Patel; J Heath Wilder; John M Weldy; Charles S Dranoff; Matthew J Weintraub; Nathan E Kim; Hao Wang; William F Sherman
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2022-04-04

9.  Treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures after femoral revision using a long stem.

Authors:  Youngwoo Kim; Chiaki Tanaka; Hiroshi Tada; Hiroshi Kanoe; Takaaki Shirai
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2015-05-10       Impact factor: 2.362

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.