Literature DB >> 28363890

A systematic review of Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures.

T Khan1, D Grindlay1, B J Ollivere1, B E Scammell1, A R J Manktelow2, R G Pearson1.   

Abstract

AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of Vancouver type B2 and B3 fractures by performing a systematic review of the methods of surgical treatment which have been reported.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search was performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. For inclusion, studies required a minimum of ten patients with a Vancouver type B2 and/or ten patients with a Vancouver type B3 fracture, a minimum mean follow-up of two years and outcomes which were matched to the type of fracture. Studies were also required to report the rate of re-operation as an outcome measure. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database.
RESULTS: A total of 22 studies were included based on the eligibility criteria, including 343 B2 fractures and 167 B3 fractures. The mean follow-up ranged from 32 months to 74 months. Of 343 Vancouver B2 fractures, the treatment in 298 (86.8%) involved revision arthroplasty and 45 (12.6%) were treated with internal fixation alone. A total of 37 patients (12.4%) treated with revision arthroplasty and six (13.3%) treated by internal fixation only underwent further re-operation. Of 167 Vancouver B3 fractures, the treatment in 160 (95.8%) involved revision arthroplasty and eight (4.8%) were treated with internal fixation without revision. A total of 23 patients (14.4%) treated with revision arthroplasty and two (28.6%) treated only with internal fixation required re-operation.
CONCLUSION: A significant proportion, particularly of B2 fractures, were treated without revision of the stem. These were associated with a higher rate of re-operation. The treatment of B3 fractures without revision of the stem resulted in a high rate of re-operation. This demonstrates the importance of careful evaluation and accurate characterisation of the fracture at the time of presentation to ensure the correct management. There is a need for improvement in the reporting of data in case series recording the outcome of the surgical treatment of periprosthetic fractures. We have suggested a minimum dataset to improve the quality of data in studies dealing with these fractures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B(4 Supple B):17-25. ©2017 Khan et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Periprosthetic fracture; Revision hip arthroplasty; Systematic review; Vancouver classification

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28363890     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B4.BJJ-2016-1311.R1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone Joint J        ISSN: 2049-4394            Impact factor:   5.082


  15 in total

1.  Diagnosis of the failed total hip replacement.

Authors:  Adeel Aqil; Nikhil Shah
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2019-12-03

2.  Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures: a comparative study of stem revision versus internal fixation with plate.

Authors:  Mauro Spina; Andrea Scalvi
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2018-03-21

Review 3.  Osteosynthesis versus revision arthroplasty in Vancouver B2 periprosthetic hip fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  David González-Martín; Luis Enrique Hernández-Castillejo; Mario Herrera-Pérez; José Luis Pais-Brito; Sergio González-Casamayor; Miriam Garrido-Miguel
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 3.693

4.  [Traumatic periprosthetic fractures in patients with total hip replacement].

Authors:  Philipp Lichte; Philipp Kobbe; Miguel Pishnamaz; Frank Hildebrand
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 5.  Does early surgery improve outcomes for periprosthetic fractures of the hip and knee? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  L Farrow; A D Ablett; H W Sargeant; T O Smith; A T Johnston
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-02-08       Impact factor: 3.067

6.  Clinical and Radiological Outcome of Vancouver B2 Fracture Treated With Open Reduction and Internal Fixation. A Multicenter Cohort Analysis.

Authors:  Peter Biberthaler; Patrick Pflüger; Markus Wurm; Marc Hanschen; Chlodwig Kirchhoff; Joseph Aderinto; George Whitwell; Peter V Giannoudis; Nikolaos Kanakaris
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2022-02-11       Impact factor: 2.884

Review 7.  Multiple failures of internal fixation for treatment of periprosthetic femoral refracture: a case report and literature review.

Authors:  Jing Shen; Yang Zhang; Guisong Yu; Weifeng Ji
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 1.671

8.  The Outcomes of Cemented Femoral Revisions for Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures in the Elderly: Comparison with Cementless Stems.

Authors:  Pavel Sponer; Martin Korbel; Michal Grinac; Libor Prokes; Ales Bezrouk; Tomas Kucera
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2021-10-27       Impact factor: 4.458

9.  Periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures in cemented and uncemented stems according to Vancouver classification: observation of a new fracture pattern.

Authors:  James Karam; Paul Campbell; Shivang Desai; Michael Hunter
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-03-10       Impact factor: 2.359

10.  Fracture fixation versus revision arthroplasty in Vancouver type B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures: a systematic review.

Authors:  Karl Stoffel; Michael Blauth; Alexander Joeris; Andrea Blumenthal; Elke Rometsch
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 3.067

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.