David Keohane1, Laith Al Azawi2, Colum Downey3, John F Quinlan3. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. doctorkeohane@gmail.com. 2. Medical School, Trinity College Dublin, College Green, Dublin, Ireland. 3. Department of Orthopaedics, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hip fractures are a common and serious orthopaedic injury. The principle of treatment for hip fractures in the "non-elderly" patient is to preserve the native hip. There is limited published literature in this area. AIM: The aim of this research is to review all of the "non-elderly" hip fracture patients to report on the demographics, fracture patterns, fixation types, and revisions. METHODS: This was a retrospective single-site review of all of the "non-elderly" patients who underwent operative management for hip fractures between 1999 and 2019. A manual review was done of all of the x-rays for the identified patients to confirm the fracture type and identify further surgeries. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighty-one patients were identified. The average age was 48.4 years old. Two hundred and thirty nine of them were intra-capsular, and 142 of them were extra-capsular fractures. Dynamic hip screw (DHS) was the most popular fixation method. In the recent decade of data, the number of hemi-arthroplasties remained consistent, but the number of total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed increased sevenfold. Mean follow-up was 35 months. Forty-three (11%) patients required follow-up surgery. Non-union accounted for 56% of all revisions and avascular necrosis for 19%. THA was performed in 70% of all revisions. CONCLUSION: DHS remains the most widely used fixation technique in an effort to preserve the native hip. The use of THA has increased and surpassed the usage of hemi-arthroplasty in recent times. A high proportion of these patients will go on to develop complications requiring secondary surgery; therefore, they all need long-term follow-up.
BACKGROUND: Hip fractures are a common and serious orthopaedic injury. The principle of treatment for hip fractures in the "non-elderly" patient is to preserve the native hip. There is limited published literature in this area. AIM: The aim of this research is to review all of the "non-elderly" hip fracture patients to report on the demographics, fracture patterns, fixation types, and revisions. METHODS: This was a retrospective single-site review of all of the "non-elderly" patients who underwent operative management for hip fractures between 1999 and 2019. A manual review was done of all of the x-rays for the identified patients to confirm the fracture type and identify further surgeries. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighty-one patients were identified. The average age was 48.4 years old. Two hundred and thirty nine of them were intra-capsular, and 142 of them were extra-capsular fractures. Dynamic hip screw (DHS) was the most popular fixation method. In the recent decade of data, the number of hemi-arthroplasties remained consistent, but the number of total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed increased sevenfold. Mean follow-up was 35 months. Forty-three (11%) patients required follow-up surgery. Non-union accounted for 56% of all revisions and avascular necrosis for 19%. THA was performed in 70% of all revisions. CONCLUSION: DHS remains the most widely used fixation technique in an effort to preserve the native hip. The use of THA has increased and surpassed the usage of hemi-arthroplasty in recent times. A high proportion of these patients will go on to develop complications requiring secondary surgery; therefore, they all need long-term follow-up.
Authors: Sandra G Pasoto; Liz A K Yoshihara; Lucy C Maeda; Marcia M S Bernik; Paulo A Lotufo; Eloisa Bonfa; Rosa M R Pereira Journal: Rheumatol Int Date: 2011-09-27 Impact factor: 2.631
Authors: Michael T Wang; Sarah H Yao; Phillip Wong; Anne Trinh; Peter R Ebeling; Ton Tran; Frances Milat; Nora Mutalima Journal: Arch Osteoporos Date: 2017-05-04 Impact factor: 2.617
Authors: Nathan N O'Hara; Gerard P Slobogean; David J Stockton; Christopher C Stewart; Niek S Klazinga Journal: Injury Date: 2019-05-28 Impact factor: 2.586
Authors: Joey P Johnson; Justin Kleiner; Avi D Goodman; Joseph A Gil; Alan H Daniels; Roman A Hayda Journal: Injury Date: 2018-11-16 Impact factor: 2.586
Authors: Andre M Samuel; Glenn S Russo; Adam M Lukasiewicz; Matthew L Webb; Daniel D Bohl; Bryce A Basques; Jonathan N Grauer Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: Christina L Ekegren; Elton R Edwards; Andrew Oppy; Susan Liew; Richard Page; Richard de Steiger; Peter A Cameron; Andrew Bucknill; Raphael Hau; Belinda J Gabbe Journal: Injury Date: 2017-01-18 Impact factor: 2.586