Stephen Robert Cannon1,2. 1. Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, Middlesex, HA7 4LP, UK. sue.cannon@tesco.net. 2. , St Giles Lodge, Amersham Road, Chalfont St Giles, Bucks, HP8 4RZ, UK. sue.cannon@tesco.net.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The optimum treatment for periprosthetic fractures in the region of the distal femur is undefined. Although internal fixation for prostheses which are stable is commonly utilised, this can lead to very prolonged morbidity and failure of the fracture to unite. Where the prosthesis is either loose or infected, revision surgery is required and a 'tumour type' prosthesis can be successfully utilised. METHODS: The outcome of 27 patients treated by an endoprosthetic replacement for periprosthetic fracture of the distal femur between 1988 and 2013 are reported. Two cases were treated by two-stage revision due to persistent infection. Clinical outcomes were assessed by Knee Society score and Knee Society pain scores. RESULTS: All 27 patients mobilised rapidly in the post-operative period and infection where present was eradicated by the technique. There have been no cases of further revision in the patients where clinical follow-up is available. Knee Society scores following treatment averaged 88 and pain scores 43 at six months post-operatively. Eight patients have died during the long study period reflecting the age of the study population. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a tumour-type endoprosthesis in situations of comminuted periprosthetic fractures associated with a loose prosthesis shows favourable results with low complication rates and rapid mobilisation.
PURPOSE: The optimum treatment for periprosthetic fractures in the region of the distal femur is undefined. Although internal fixation for prostheses which are stable is commonly utilised, this can lead to very prolonged morbidity and failure of the fracture to unite. Where the prosthesis is either loose or infected, revision surgery is required and a 'tumour type' prosthesis can be successfully utilised. METHODS: The outcome of 27 patients treated by an endoprosthetic replacement for periprosthetic fracture of the distal femur between 1988 and 2013 are reported. Two cases were treated by two-stage revision due to persistent infection. Clinical outcomes were assessed by Knee Society score and Knee Society pain scores. RESULTS: All 27 patients mobilised rapidly in the post-operative period and infection where present was eradicated by the technique. There have been no cases of further revision in the patients where clinical follow-up is available. Knee Society scores following treatment averaged 88 and pain scores 43 at six months post-operatively. Eight patients have died during the long study period reflecting the age of the study population. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a tumour-type endoprosthesis in situations of comminuted periprosthetic fractures associated with a loose prosthesis shows favourable results with low complication rates and rapid mobilisation.
Authors: Tatu J Mäkinen; Herman S Dhotar; Simcha G Fichman; Matthew J Gunton; Mitchell Woodside; Oleg Safir; David Backstein; Thomas L Willett; Paul R T Kuzyk Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2015-04-16 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Aadil Mumith; Melanie Coathup; Thomas C Edwards; Panos Gikas; Will Aston; Gordon Blunn Journal: Bone Joint Res Date: 2020-07-08 Impact factor: 5.853
Authors: Marco De Gori; Guido Scoccianti; Filippo Frenos; Leonardo Bettini; Filippo Familiari; Giorgio Gasparini; Giovanni Beltrami; Pierluigi Cuomo; Pietro De Biase; Rodolfo Capanna Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2016-12-05 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Klemens Vertesich; Stephan E Puchner; Kevin Staats; Markus Schreiner; Christian Hipfl; Bernd Kubista; Johannes Holinka; Reinhard Windhager Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2019-01-31 Impact factor: 2.362