Young-Soo Shin1, Hyun-Jung Kim2, Dae-Hee Lee3. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul Veterans Hospital, Seoul, Korea. 2. Department of Preventive Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Ilwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 135-710, Korea. eoak22@empal.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This meta-analysis was designed to compare clinical outcomes, including knee scale score and nonunion rate, of patients with periprosthetic supracondylar fractures of the distal femur after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) who were treated using locking compression plates and retrograde intramedullary nails. METHODS: Studies were included in this meta-analysis if they compared clinical outcomes, including operation time, Knee Society Score (KSS), time to union, nonunion rate, and revision rate due to nonunion, in patients who underwent locking compression plate or retrograde intramedullary nail for periprosthetic distal femur fractures following TKA. RESULTS: Eight studies were included in this meta-analysis. Mean operation time was 11 min shorter (95 % CI -9.56 to 31.33 min; n.s.) and KSS one point higher (95 % CI -8.88 to 11.10; n.s.) with retrograde intramedullary nail than with locking compression plate, but these differences were not statistically significant. The two groups were also similar in mean time to union (0.46 weeks 95 % CI -1.17 to 2.08 weeks; n.s.), the proportion of subjects with nonunion (OR 0.83, 95 % CI 0.26-2.60; n.s.) and the proportion that underwent revision surgery (OR 0.88, 95 % CI 0.32-2.40; n.s.). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes, including nonunion and revision rates, were similar in patients who underwent locking compression plate and retrograde intramedullary nail fixation for periprosthetic supracondylar femoral fracture following TKA. Orthopaedic surgeons must train to master both the retrograde intramedullary nail and locking compression plate techniques because both approaches can be considered for periprosthetic distal femur fracture after TKA as they have similar clinicoradiologic outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.
PURPOSE: This meta-analysis was designed to compare clinical outcomes, including knee scale score and nonunion rate, of patients with periprosthetic supracondylar fractures of the distal femur after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) who were treated using locking compression plates and retrograde intramedullary nails. METHODS: Studies were included in this meta-analysis if they compared clinical outcomes, including operation time, Knee Society Score (KSS), time to union, nonunion rate, and revision rate due to nonunion, in patients who underwent locking compression plate or retrograde intramedullary nail for periprosthetic distal femur fractures following TKA. RESULTS: Eight studies were included in this meta-analysis. Mean operation time was 11 min shorter (95 % CI -9.56 to 31.33 min; n.s.) and KSS one point higher (95 % CI -8.88 to 11.10; n.s.) with retrograde intramedullary nail than with locking compression plate, but these differences were not statistically significant. The two groups were also similar in mean time to union (0.46 weeks 95 % CI -1.17 to 2.08 weeks; n.s.), the proportion of subjects with nonunion (OR 0.83, 95 % CI 0.26-2.60; n.s.) and the proportion that underwent revision surgery (OR 0.88, 95 % CI 0.32-2.40; n.s.). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes, including nonunion and revision rates, were similar in patients who underwent locking compression plate and retrograde intramedullary nail fixation for periprosthetic supracondylar femoral fracture following TKA. Orthopaedic surgeons must train to master both the retrograde intramedullary nail and locking compression plate techniques because both approaches can be considered for periprosthetic distal femur fracture after TKA as they have similar clinicoradiologic outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.
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: Bill Ristevski; Aaron Nauth; Dale S Williams; Jeremy A Hall; Daniel B Whelan; Mohit Bhandari; Emil H Schemitsch Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: Zhiyong Hou; Thomas R Bowen; Kaan Irgit; Kent Strohecker; Michelle E Matzko; James Widmaier; Wade R Smith Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 2.512
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
Authors: Thomas M Large; James F Kellam; Michael J Bosse; Stephen H Sims; Peter Althausen; John L Masonis Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2008-07-09 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Giorgio Cacciola; Fabio Mancino; Federico De Meo; Antongiulio Bruschetta; Ivan De Martino; Pietro Cavaliere Journal: Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil Date: 2021-08-27