| Literature DB >> 30577781 |
Sebastian Lotzien1,2, Valentin Rausch3, Thomas Armin Schildhauer3, Jan Gessmann3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nonunions of the subtrochanteric region of the femur after previous intramedullary nailing can be difficult to address. Implant failure and bone defects around the implant significantly complicate the therapy, and complex surgical procedures with implant removal, extensive debridement of the nonunion site, bone grafting and reosteosynthesis usually become necessary. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the records of a series of patients with subtrochanteric femoral nonunions who were treated with dynamic condylar screws (DCS) regarding their healing rate, subsequent revision surgeries and implant-related complications.Entities:
Keywords: DCS; Dynamic condylar screw; Hardware failure; Intramedullary nailing; Pseudarthrosis; Subtrochanteric nonunion
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30577781 PMCID: PMC6303875 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-018-2372-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Fig. 1Inclusion criteria
Fig. 2An 86-year-old female patient with a persistent femoral nonunion after nailing and having already undergone revision with augmentation plating. There is a lack of callus formation and radiographic breakage of the nail and two screws with varus deformation of the femur with a CCD of 104
Group comparison
| Group 1 ( | Group 2 ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | 0.58 | ||
| Female | 16 (59.26%) | 8 (61.54%) | |
| Male | 11 (40.74%) | 5 (38.46%) | |
| Fracture-typea | 0.32 | ||
| Seinsheimer Type IIA | 3 | 2 | |
| Seinsheimer Type IIB | 1 | 2 | |
| Seinsheimer Type IIIA | 10 | 3 | |
| Seinsheimer Type IIIB | – | 1 | |
| Seinsheimer Type IV | 2 | – | |
| Seinsheimer Type V | 1 | – | |
| OTA-typea | 0.54 | ||
| 32A1 | 1 | 2 | |
| 32A2 | – | – | |
| 32A3 | 3 | 2 | |
| 32B2 | 10 | 4 | |
| 32B3 | 2 | – | |
| 32C2 | – | – | |
| 32C3 | 1 | – | |
| Trauma mechanismb | 0.61 | ||
| Low energy | 16 | 9 | |
| High energy | 6 | 3 | |
| Nonunion-type | 0.53 | ||
| hypertrophic | 3/27 (11.1%) | 2/13 (15.4%) | |
| atrophic | 24/27 (88.9%) | 11/13 (84.6%) | |
| Age | 64.96 ± 15.87 | 66.31 ± 12.66 | 0.35 |
| BMIc | 26.9 ± 5.41 | 29.91 ± 5.6 | 0.57 |
| Time to index procedure (months) | 10.37 ± 7.2 | 8.85 ± 5.77 | 0.67 |
| Prior surgeries per particpant | 0.22 ± 0.42 | 0.69 ± 1.18 | 0.21 |
| Mean operation time (minutes) | 156.74 ± 42.63 | 149.08 ± 41.36 | 0.59 |
| Number of red blood cell units tranfused | 2.96 ± 3.57 | 3.15 ± 3.46 | 0.87 |
| Lenght of hospital stay (days) | 14.74 ± 5.45 | 15.77 ± 8.64 | 0.89 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 3/27 (11.1%) | 0/13 (0%) | 0.54 |
| Steroid use | 3/27 (11.1%) | 0/13 (0%) | 0.54 |
| Smoking | 3/27 (11.1%) | 3/13 (23.1%) | 0.37 |
| Osteoporosis | 2/27(7.4%) | 3/13(23.1%) | 0.31 |
| Bony healing | 27/27(100%) | 10/13(76.92%) | 0.03 |
| Healing time (months) | 7.96 ± 6.53 | 23.11 ± 26.57 | 0.01 |
| Follow-up (months) | 21.48 ± 17.52 | 36.15 ± 50.7 | 0.54 |
aincomplete dataset; in 15 participants Information could not be gathered due to incomplete medical records at admission to our clinic
bincomplete dataset; in six participants Information could not be gathered due to incomplete medical records at admission to our clinic
cincomplete dataset; in one participant Information could not be gathered due to incomplete medical records at admission to our clinic
Fig. 3Postoperative X-rays after nail removal, restoration of the CCD (126°) and DCS treatment with a precontoured plate by leaving the augmentation plate in situ
Fig. 4Final follow-up visit six months after index procedure showing bony union
Fig. 5AP and lateral radiographs of a 56-year-old female patient with a hypertrophic nonunion after nailing with an implant failure and varus nonunion of the femur with a CCD of 109
Fig. 6X-ray after implant removal, nonunion debridement, restoration of the CCD (131°) and ORIF utilizing a DCS with an additional LCDCP
Fig. 7X-rays of the same patient showing a healed nonunion six months after index treatment
Additional information about the patients with implant failure after index procedure
| Case number | Age | DCS Construction (holes) | Additional plate | Complication | Therapie |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 58 | 14 | No | Infection | Surgical debridement leaving the plate in situ in addition to antibiotic therapy |
| 4 | 67 | 16 | No | Periimplant fracture four days after index procedure | Add. Plate |
| 5 | 52 | 8 | No | Persisting nonuinon without implant failure | Add. Plate + bone grafting |
| 10 | 72 | 14 | Yes | Implant failure; prox. Plate broken between hole 1/2 | Re-ORIF with double plate construction + bone grafting |
| 11 | 87 | 14 | Yes | Implant failure; prox. Plate broken between hole 2/3 | Re-ORIF+ bone grafting |
| 14 | 69 | 16 | Yes | Implant failure; prox. Plate broken between hole 3/4 | Re-ORIF+ bone grafting |
| 21 | 59 | 16 | No | Implant failure; Plate broken between hole 7/8 | Re-ORIF+ bone grafting |
| 24 | 56 | a | No | Implant failure; prox. Plate broken between hole 8/9 | Re-ORIF with double plate construction + bone grafting |
| 26 | 50 | 12 | Yes | Implant failure; prox. Plate broken between hole 3/4 | Re-ORIF with double plate construction + bone grafting |
| 31 | 68 | 14 | Yes | Implant failure; Screws broken distal 4 screws with implant loosenig | Re-ORIF+ bone grafting |
| 40 | 75 | 16 | No | Implant failure; Screw cut out | THR |
| 53 | 91 | 12 | No | Infection | Surgical debridement leaving the plate in situ in addition to antibiotic therapy |
| 54 | 58 | 14 | Yes | Implant failure; prox. Plate broken between hole 3/4 | Re-ORIF with double plate construction |
aPlate type remained unknown do to lacking data