Literature DB >> 23219240

Less invasive polyaxial locking plate fixation in periprosthetic and peri-implant fractures of the femur--a prospective study of 41 patients.

Steffen Ruchholtz1, Bilal El-Zayat, Dimitri Kreslo, Benjamin Bücking, Ulrike Lewan, Antonio Krüger, Ralph Zettl.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A great variety of methods for the stabilisation of periprosthetic fractures around total hip (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have been described. We present the data of our experience in combining a polyaxial, anatomical locking plate with a standardised less invasive technique in the treatment of periprosthetic and peri-implant (femoral nail) femur fractures in this prospective study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A consecutive series of 41 patients (33 women; age 79.8±11 years) with 41 fractures (n=17 periprosthetic THA, n=10 periprosthetic TKA, n=3 interprosthetic, n=11 perinail) was treated in a 'mini-open' (MO; direct reduction of the fracture and percutaneous plate fixation in two-part fractures; n=22) or a 'minimally invasive' (MI; indirect reduction and percutaneous fixation; n=19) technique. All patients were followed up for 12 months postoperatively.
RESULTS: The polyaxial locking mechanism allowed for the setting of a mean of 5.3 screws around an intramedullary implant. Supported by the less invasive strategy, mainly long plates (n=36; 88% were longer than 24cm) were applied without relevant soft-tissue complication. Five surgical revisions (12.1%) had to be performed. During the first postoperative stay, one seroma was evacuated and in two cases the plate broke due to failed biological healing 6 months after the MO technique. In one case, a revision prosthesis had to be implanted due to ligamentous instability, and in another case, soft-tissue balancing of the patella was performed. In the MO group, four of the five complications requiring surgical revision were seen. There was no infection. No statistical difference was seen between the MO and the MI groups for operating room (OR) time and perioperative need for transfusion. In patients with a poor state of health (n=8; immobile and Glasgow Coma Outcome Scale=3), no local complications were seen. All fractures in the peri-implant fracture group (n=11) healed uneventfully.
CONCLUSION: Periprosthetic fracture fixation can be performed as part of a standardised less invasive strategy, but the MI technique should be the preferred treatment. The NCB(®) system allows for a stable plate fixation around an intramedullary implant. With the less invasive technique, long plates can be applied with low rates of soft-tissue complication and implant failure.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23219240     DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2012.10.035

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


  19 in total

1.  Minimally invasive surgery with locking plate for periprosthetic femoral fractures: technical note.

Authors:  Matthieu Ehlinger; Benjamin Scheibling; Michel Rahme; David Brinkert; Benoit Schenck; Antonio Di Marco; Philippe Adam; François Bonnomet
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-08-08       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  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

3.  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

4.  [Risk factors for failure of osteosynthesis. After periprosthetic fractures of the knee joint].

Authors:  M Hanschen; P Biberthaler
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 1.087

5.  Outcome of periprosthetic femoral fractures following total hip replacement treated with polyaxial locking plate.

Authors:  M F Hoffmann; S Lotzien; T A Schildhauer
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2016-09-06

Review 6.  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

7.  Fractures after cephalomedullary nailing of the femur : Systematization of surgical fixation based on the analysis of a single-center retrospective cohort.

Authors:  Inca Vilar-Sastre; Sebastián Corró; Jordi Tomàs-Hernández; Jordi Teixidor-Serra; Jordi Selga-Marsà; Carlos-Alberto Piedra-Calle; Vicente Molero-García; Yaiza García-Sánchez; José-Vicente Andrés-Peiró
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2022-07-02       Impact factor: 3.479

8.  Management of periprosthetic acetabular fractures in elderly patients--a minimally invasive approach.

Authors:  Ralph Zettl; Daphne Eschbach; Steffen Ruchholtz
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  [Treatment of peri-implant refracture after intramedullary nail fixation for intertrochanteric fractures].

Authors:  Lin Teng; Yongchuan Xiao; Gang Zhong
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2021-03-15

10.  Plate on plate osteosynthesis for the treatment of nonhealed periplate fractures.

Authors:  Georgios Arealis; Vassilios S Nikolaou; Andrew Lacon; Neil Ashwood; Mark Hamlet
Journal:  ISRN Orthop       Date:  2014-03-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.