| Literature DB >> 33760940 |
Maximilian J Hartel1,2, Tareq Naji3,4, Florian Fensky3, Frank O Henes5, Darius M Thiesen3, Wolfgang Lehmann6, Karl-Heinz Frosch3,7, Dimitris Ntalos3.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the range of indications of an anatomical-preshaped three-dimensional suprapectineal plate and to assess the impact of the bone mass density on radiologic outcomes in different types of acetabular fractures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A consecutive case series of 50 acetabular fractures (patient age 69 ± 23 years) treated with suprapectineal anatomic plates were analyzed in a retrospective study. The analysis included: Mechanism of injury, fracture pattern, surgical approach, need for additional total hip arthroplasty, intra- or postoperative complications, as well as bone mass density and radiological outcome on postoperative computed tomography.Entities:
Keywords: Acetabular fracture; Anatomic plate; Bone mass density; Geriatric traumatology; Suprapectineal plate
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33760940 PMCID: PMC9217777 DOI: 10.1007/s00402-021-03867-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg ISSN: 0936-8051 Impact factor: 2.928
Absolute and relative distribution of injury mechanisms and associated fracture patterns according to the Letournel classification
| Mechanism of injury | Absolute and relative distribution |
|---|---|
| Fall < 3 m | 27 (54%) |
| Fall > 3 m | 7 (14%) |
| Motor vehicle accident | 7 (14%) |
| Bicycle accident | 6 (12%) |
| Ski accident | 1 (2%) |
| Non-traumatic | 2 (4%) |
| Polytrauma | 17 (34%) |
| Fracture pattern simple (Letournel) | |
| Posterior wall | 0 (0%) |
| Posterior column | 0 (0%) |
| Anterior wall | 0 (0%) |
| Anterior column | 8 (16%) |
| Transverse | 2 (4%) |
| Fracture pattern associated (Letournel) | |
| Posterior column + posterior wall | 1 (2%) |
| Transverse + posterior wall | 0 (0%) |
| T-style | 5 (10%) |
| Anterior column + posterior hemitransverse | 18 (36%) |
| Both columns | 16 (32%) |
Fig. 1a Intraoperative picture of the AIP and DAA approaches combined, and b corresponding final intraoperative radiograph after finished acute total hip arthroplasty
Overview of the different surgical approaches used in the cohort
| Surgical approach | Absolute and relative distribution |
|---|---|
| AIP | 49 (98%) |
| Pararectus | 1 (2%) |
| Additional surgical approach (21/50, 42%) | |
1st ilioinguinal window 1st and 2nd ilioinguinal window | 13 (26%) 1 (2%) |
| Kocher–Langenbeck | 3 (6%) |
| DAA/Smith Petersen | 4 (8%) |
Fig. 2Example of an anterior column type acetabular fracture in a 72-year-old male with impaired bone quality and a large marginal impaction (gull sign). a Preoperative CT scan displaying a comminuted and impacted joint. b Intraoperative fluoroscopic images showing the head reduced from its subluxation using axial traction (above) and a reduction maneuver of the impacted joint surface using a rasp elevator. c Postoperative CT with a very successful yet imperfect reduction result (gap: 2 mm, step: 0 mm)
Fig. 3The remaining postoperative steps compared to the bone density estimated by the HU measurements