Literature DB >> 25877161

Periprosthetic supracondylar femoral fractures following knee arthroplasty: a biomechanical comparison of four methods of fixation.

Tatu J Mäkinen1, Herman S Dhotar, Simcha G Fichman, Matthew J Gunton, Mitchell Woodside, Oleg Safir, David Backstein, Thomas L Willett, Paul R T Kuzyk.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the biomechanical properties of four fixation options for periprosthetic supracondylar femoral fractures.
METHODS: Fourth-generation composite femurs were implanted with a posterior-stabilizing femoral component of total knee arthroplasty. All femurs were osteotomized to produce a AO/OTA 33-A3 fracture pattern and four different constructs were tested: (1) non-locking plate; (2) polyaxial locking plate; (3) intramedullary fibular strut allograft with polyaxial locking plate; (4) retrograde intramedullary nail. The composite femurs underwent non-destructive tests to determine construct stiffness in axial and torsional cyclic loading. The final testing consisted of quasi-static axial loading until failure.
RESULTS: Under cyclic torsional loading, the retrograde intramedullary nail was less stiff than non-locking plate, polyaxial locking plate and intramedullary fibular strut allograft with polyaxial locking plate (p = 0.046). No differences were detected in cyclic axial loading between the different constructs. During quasi-static axial loading to failure, the intramedullary nail achieved the highest axial stiffness while the non-locking plate showed the lowest (p = 0.036).
CONCLUSIONS: The intramedullary fibular strut allograft with polyaxial locking plate did not prove to be significantly better to the polyaxial locking plate only in a periprosthetic distal femur fracture model.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25877161     DOI: 10.1007/s00264-015-2764-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  27 in total

1.  Biomechanical analysis of proximal humeral fixation using locking plate fixation with an intramedullary fibular allograft.

Authors:  Craig Mathison; Rey Chaudhary; Lauren Beaupre; Mathew Reynolds; Samer Adeeb; Martin Bouliane
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2010-05-16       Impact factor: 2.063

2.  Role of long stem revision knee prosthesis in periprosthetic and complex distal femoral fractures: a review of eight patients.

Authors:  Kuntrapaka Srinivasan; David A Macdonald; Christopher C Tzioupis; Peter V Giannoudis
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.586

3.  The biomechanics of three different fracture fixation implants for distal femur repair in the presence of a tumor-like defect.

Authors:  Shahryar Ahmadi; Suraj Shah; Jay S Wunder; Emil H Schemitsch; Peter C Ferguson; Rad Zdero
Journal:  Proc Inst Mech Eng H       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 1.617

Review 4.  The treatment of periprosthetic femur fractures after total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Vamsi K Kancherla; Chinenye O Nwachuku
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 2.472

5.  Impact of the economic downturn on total joint replacement demand in the United States: updated projections to 2021.

Authors:  Steven M Kurtz; Kevin L Ong; Edmund Lau; Kevin J Bozic
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2014-04-16       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Revision internal fixation and nonvascular fibular graft for femoral neck nonunion.

Authors:  Hossein Elgafy; Nabil A Ebraheim; Harold Gregory Bach
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2011-01

7.  Midterm results of treatment with a retrograde nail for supracondylar periprosthetic fractures of the femur following total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  John Gliatis; Panagiotis Megas; Elias Panagiotopoulos; Elias Lambiris
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.512

8.  Finite element comparison of retrograde intramedullary nailing and locking plate fixation with/without an intramedullary allograft for distal femur fracture following total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Shih-Hao Chen; Ming-Chieh Chiang; Ching-Hua Hung; Shang-Chih Lin; Hsiao-Wei Chang
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 2.199

9.  Intramedullary nailing versus locked plate for treating supracondylar periprosthetic femur fractures.

Authors:  John G Horneff; John A Scolaro; S Mehdi Jafari; Amer Mirza; Javad Parvizi; Samir Mehta
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 1.390

10.  Distal femoral replacement in periprosthetic fracture around total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  S S Jassim; I McNamara; P Hopgood
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 2.586

View more
  10 in total

1.  Periprosthetic fractures and complicated arthroplasties.

Authors:  Moussa Hamadouche; Luis Lopez-Duran Stern
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  The use of megaprosthesis in the treatment of periprosthetic knee fractures.

Authors:  Stephen Robert Cannon
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-08-27       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Outcomes of distal femur fractures treated with the Synthes 4.5 mm VA-LCP Curved Condylar Plate.

Authors:  Khang H Dang; Connor A Armstrong; Ravi A Karia; Boris A Zelle
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Locked plate versus retrograde intramedullary nail for periprosthetic femur fractures above total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Bo Li; Peng Gao; Guixing Qiu; Tao Li
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-09-09       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 5.  Similar outcomes of locking compression plating and retrograde intramedullary nailing for periprosthetic supracondylar femoral fractures following total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Young-Soo Shin; Hyun-Jung Kim; Dae-Hee Lee
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-02-20       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Is obesity related with periprosthetic fractures around the knee?

Authors:  José Carlos Minarro; Maria Teresa Urbano-Luque; Rafael Quevedo-Reinoso; Manuel Jesús López-Pulido; Ángel Fernández-González; Alberto Damián Delgado-Martínez
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Treatment of periprosthetic supracondylar fractures after CR total knee arthroplasty with retrograde intramedullary nailing in an elderly population: a long term evaluation.

Authors:  Simone Stefano Finzi; Massimo Berdini; Donato Carola; Giuliano Lattanzi; Gianclaudio Orabona; Raffaele Pascarella; Antonio Pompilio Gigante; Simone Cerbasi
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2022-04-25

8.  Use of an intramedullary fibular strut allograft and dual locking plate in periprosthetic fractures above total knee arthroplasty: new application of a well-known treatment method in trauma.

Authors:  Dongwhan Suh; Jong-Hun Ji; Jun-Young Heu; Jung-Youn Kim; Heeman Chi; Se-Won Lee
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2022-03-06       Impact factor: 2.374

9.  Locked compression plating versus retrograde intramedullary nailing in the treatment of periprosthetic supracondylar knee fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Henry Magill; Nikhil Ponugoti; Amr Selim; James Platt
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 2.359

Review 10.  Femoral Periprosthetic Fractures after Total Knee Arthroplasty: New Surgically Oriented Classification with a Review of Current Treatments.

Authors:  Seung Joon Rhee; Jae Young Cho; Yoon Young Choi; Takeshi Sawaguchi; Jeung Tak Suh
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2018-12-01
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.