Literature DB >> 26749332

Prophylactic augmentation of the proximal femur: an investigation of two techniques.

Christoph Raas1, Ladina Hofmann-Fliri2, Romed Hörmann3, Werner Schmoelz4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Osteoporotic hip fractures are an increasing problem in an ageing population. They result in high morbidity, mortality and high socioeconomic costs. For patients with poor bone quality, prophylactic augmentation of the proximal femur might be an option for fracture prevention.
METHODS: In two groups of paired human femora the potential of limited polymethyl-methacrylate (PMMA) augmentation (11-15 ml) in a V-shape pattern and the insertion of a proximal femur nail antirotation (PFNA) blade were investigated. The testing was carried out pair wise simulating the single leg stand. The untreated femur in each pair served as control. An axial load was applied until failure. Load displacement parameters and temperature increase during the augmentation process were recorded.
RESULTS: In the PMMA group no significant difference was found between the augmented and non-augmented specimen concerning load to failure (p = 0.35) and energy to failure (p = 0.9). A median temperature increase of 9.5 °C was observed in the augmented specimen. A significant correlation was found between the amount of applied PMMA and the temperature increase (Cor. Coef. = 0.82, p = 0.042). In the PFNA group, a significant decrease of load to failure and a non-significant decrease of energy to failure were observed (p = 0.037 and p = 0.075).
CONCLUSION: Limited V-shaped PMMA augmentation and PFNA blade insertion did not show any improvement in failure load or energy to failure. Volumes of up to 15 ml PMMA did not cause a critical surface temperature increase.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cement augmentation; Hip Fracture; Osteoporosis; Single leg stand

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26749332     DOI: 10.1007/s00402-015-2400-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg        ISSN: 0936-8051            Impact factor:   3.067


  4 in total

Review 1.  Prophylactic augmentation of the osteoporotic proximal femur-mission impossible?

Authors:  Peter Varga; Ladina Hofmann-Fliri; Michael Blauth; Markus Windolf
Journal:  Bonekey Rep       Date:  2016-12-07

2.  Augmentation of core decompression with synthetic bone graft does not improve mechanical properties of the proximal femur.

Authors:  Samuel A Hockett; John T Sherrill; Micah Self; Simon C Mears; C Lowry Barnes; Erin M Mannen
Journal:  J Mech Behav Biomed Mater       Date:  2020-12-11

Review 3.  Unmet needs and current and future approaches for osteoporotic patients at high risk of hip fracture.

Authors:  Serge Ferrari; Jean-Yves Reginster; Maria Luisa Brandi; John A Kanis; Jean-Pierre Devogelaer; Jean-Marc Kaufman; Jean-Marc Féron; Andreas Kurth; René Rizzoli
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 2.617

4.  In vitro injection of osteoporotic cadaveric femurs with a triphasic calcium-based implant confers immediate biomechanical integrity.

Authors:  John D Stroncek; Jonathan L Shaul; Dominique Favell; Ronald S Hill; Bryan M Huber; James G Howe; Mary L Bouxsein
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2019-03-20       Impact factor: 3.494

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.