Literature DB >> 24869614

Outcomes following surgical treatment of periprosthetic femur fractures: a single centre series.

Natasha Holder1, Steve Papp1, Wade Gofton1, Paul E Beaulé1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic femoral fracture after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an increasing clinical problem and a challenging complication to treat surgically. The aim of this retrospective study was to review the treatment of periprosthetic fractures and the complication rate associated with treatment at our institution.
METHODS: We reviewed the cases of patients with periprosthetic femoral fractures treated between January 2004 and June 2009. We used the Vancouver classification to assess fracture types, and we identified the surgical interventions used for these fracture types and the associated complications.
RESULTS: We treated 45 patients with periprosthetic femoral fractures during the study period (15 men, 30 women, mean age 78 yr). Based on Vancouver classification, 2 patients had AL fractures, 9 had AG, 15 had B1, 24 had B2, 2 had B3 and 4 had C fractures. Overall, 82% of fractures united with a mean time to union of 15 (range 2-64) months. Fourteen patients (31%) had complications; 11 of them had a reoperation: 6 to treat an infection, 6 for nonunion and 2 for aseptic femoral component loosening.
CONCLUSION: Periprosthetic fractures are difficult to manage. Careful preoperative planning and appropriate intraoperative management in the hands of experienced surgeons may increase the chances of successful treatment. However, patients should be counselled on the high risk of complications when presenting with this problem.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24869614      PMCID: PMC4035404          DOI: 10.1503/cjs.014813

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Surg        ISSN: 0008-428X            Impact factor:   2.089


  21 in total

1.  The reliability and validity of the Vancouver classification of femoral fractures after hip replacement.

Authors:  O H Brady; D S Garbuz; B A Masri; C P Duncan
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  Three hundred and twenty-one periprosthetic femoral fractures.

Authors:  Hans Lindahl; Göran Garellick; Hans Regnér; Peter Herberts; Henrik Malchau
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  Risk factors for failure after treatment of a periprosthetic fracture of the femur.

Authors:  H Lindahl; H Malchau; A Odén; G Garellick
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2006-01

Review 4.  Fractures of the femur after hip replacement.

Authors:  C P Duncan; B A Masri
Journal:  Instr Course Lect       Date:  1995

Review 5.  Epidemiology: hip and knee.

Authors:  D J Berry
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 2.472

6.  Indirect reduction and plate fixation, without grafting, for periprosthetic femoral shaft fractures about a stable intramedullary implant. Surgical Technique.

Authors:  William M Ricci; Brett R Bolhofner; Timothy Loftus; Christopher Cox; Scott Mitchell; Joseph Borrelli
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Periprosthetic femoral fractures classification and demographics of 1049 periprosthetic femoral fractures from the Swedish National Hip Arthroplasty Register.

Authors:  Hans Lindahl; Henrik Malchau; Peter Herberts; Göran Garellick
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 4.757

8.  Closed intramedullary nailing of femoral fractures. A report of five hundred and twenty cases.

Authors:  R A Winquist; S T Hansen; D K Clawson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1984-04       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 9.  Risk factors for periprosthetic femoral fracture.

Authors:  John Franklin; Henrik Malchau
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2007-04-30       Impact factor: 2.586

10.  Periprosthetic Vancouver type B1 and C fractures treated by locking-plate osteosynthesis: fracture union and reoperations in 60 consecutive fractures.

Authors:  Lonnie Froberg; Anders Troelsen; Michael Brix
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2012-11-11       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  7 in total

1.  Periprosthetic joint infection is the main reason for failure in patients following periprosthetic fracture treated with revision arthroplasty.

Authors:  Janna van den Kieboom; Venkatsaiakhil Tirumala; Liang Xiong; Christian Klemt; Young-Min Kwon
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-05-15       Impact factor: 3.067

2.  Adequate surgical treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures following hip arthroplasty does not correlate with functional outcome and quality of life.

Authors:  Sven Märdian; Klaus-Dieter Schaser; Johanna Gruner; Franziska Scheel; Carsten Perka; Philipp Schwabe
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-01-27       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 3.  Periprosthetic fractures around the femoral stem: overcoming challenges and avoiding pitfalls.

Authors:  Andrew N Fleischman; Antonia F Chen
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2015-09

4.  Correlations between Vancouver type of periprosthetic femur fracture and treatment outcomes.

Authors:  Pawel Legosz; Anna E Platek; Anna Rys-Czaporowska; Filip M Szymanski; Pawel Maldyk
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2019-05-27

5.  Midterm Results of Consecutive Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Vancouver Type A and B.

Authors:  Klemens Trieb; Rainer Fiala; Christian Briglauer
Journal:  Clin Pract       Date:  2016-08-24

6.  Adjuvant Teriparatide Therapy for Surgical Treatment of Femoral Fractures; Does It Work?

Authors:  Jung Taek Kim; Hyung Jun Jeong; Soong Joon Lee; Hee Joong Kim; Jeong Joon Yoo
Journal:  Hip Pelvis       Date:  2016-09-30

7.  Concepts and Potential Future Developments for Treatment of Periprosthetic Proximal Femoral Fractures.

Authors:  Stephan Brand; Max Ettinger; Mohamed Omar; Nael Hawi; Christian Krettek; Maximilian Petri
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2015-08-31
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.