Effects of Proximal Femoral Nail Anti-Rotation (PFNA-II) and Artificial Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) on Unstable Intertrochanteric Femoral Fracture Combined with Severe Osteoporosis

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 413-417
Author(s):  
Xiaosong Chen ◽  
Xunsheng Cheng ◽  
Wuxiu Ma ◽  
Congcong Chen ◽  
Gan Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Femoral Fracture ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail ◽  
Therapeutic Effects ◽  
Severe Osteoporosis ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Femoral Nail ◽  
Intertrochanteric Femoral Fracture

The current study was conducted to compare the therapeutic effects of proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA-II) and artificial total hip arthroplasty (THA) on elderly Chinese patients with unstable intertrochanteric femoral fracture combined with severe osteoporosis. There were 60 people in each group. The duration of surgery, blood loss, and weight-bearing period when standing on the floor were compared between the two groups (P > 0.05). Harries function scores of both groups increased over time. Scores of THA group were significantly higher than those of PFNA-II group during six- and twelve-months follow-up visit (P < 0.05). In addition, excellent and good rates of hip joint function in THA group were higher than those of PFNA-II group during twelve-month follow-up visit (P < 0.05). The occurrence rates of follow-up complications in both groups showed no statistical significance (P > 0.05). Thus, both PFNA-II and THA have good effects on Chinese elderly patients with unstable intertrochanteric femoral fracture combined with severe osteoporosis.

scholarly journals Cemented versus uncemented total hip arthroplasty for failed proximal femoral nail anti-rotation fixation in patients with intertrochanteric femur fractures: 5-year results of a retrospective observational study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenli Chen ◽  
Mao Shuai ◽  
Jinluan Lin ◽  
Baomin Chen ◽  
Mingdong Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Femur Fractures ◽  
Femoral Nail ◽  
Uncemented Total Hip Arthroplasty

Abstract Background: Cemented or uncemented total hip arthroplasty (CTHA or UTHA) is being increasingly performed in patients with intertrochanteric femur fractures (IFFs) who failed to be treated with proximal femoral nail anti-rotations (PFNA) fixation. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of CTHA or UTHA following prior failed PFNA fixation in patients with IFFs.Methods: Data from 244 patients with IFFs who underwent a conversion of PFNA to CTHA (PCA, n =120) or to UTHA (PUA, n = 124) due to pain and hip disfunction during 2008-2018 were retrospectively analysed. Follow-up occurred 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively and yearly thereafter. The mean follow-up was 64 months (range, 57 – 71 months). The Harris hip score (HHS) was the primary outcome; the incidence of major orthopaedic complications was the secondary outcome.Results: At the final follow-up, HHS was 79.54±18.85 vs 75.26±18.27 (PCA vs PUA, p = 0.014). There were significant differences between groups regarding the incidence of prosthesis revision, prosthesis loosening, and periprosthetic fracture (5.8% for PCA vs 14.5% for PUA, p = 0.025; 10.0% for PCA vs 20.1% for PUA, p = 0.027; 3.3% for PCA vs 10.5% for PUA, p = 0.028, respectively). Conclusion: The results of the study demonstrated a significant advantage with respect to HHS and major orthopaedic complication rate in favor of CTHA, as compared to UTHA in patients with a failed PFNA treatment.

scholarly journals Conversion from a failed proximal femoral nail anti-rotation to a cemented or uncemented total hip arthroplasty device: a retrospective review of 198 hips with previous intertrochanteric femur fractures

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Weiguang Yu ◽  
Xiulan Han ◽  
Wenli Chen ◽  
Shuai Mao ◽  
Mingdong Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Complication Rate ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Elderly Individuals ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Femoral Nail ◽  
Uncemented Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background At present, it is unclear which device (uncemented or cemented total hip arthroplasty [UTA or CTA, respectively]) is more suitable for the conversion of a failed proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA). The aim of this review was to assess the outcomes of failed PFNAs converted to a UTA or CTA device in elderly individuals with intertrochanteric femoral fractures (IFFs). Methods Two hundred fifty-eight elderly individuals (258 hips) with IFFs who underwent a conversion to a UTA or CTA device following failed PFNAs during 2007–2017 were retrospectively identified from the China Southern Medical Centre (CSMC) database. The primary endpoint was the Harris Hip Score (HHS); secondary endpoint was the key orthopaedic complication rate. Results The median follow-up was 65 months (60–69 months). Significant distinctions were observed (87.26 ± 16.62 for UTA vs. 89.32 ± 16.08 for CTA, p = 0.021; 86.61 ± 12.24 for symptomatic UTA vs. 88.68 ± 13.30 for symptomatic CTA, p = 0.026). A significant difference in the overall key orthopaedic complication rate was detected (40.8% [40/98] vs. 19.0% [19/100], p = 0.001). Apparent distinctions were detected in terms of the rate of revision, loosening, and periprosthetic fracture (11.2% for UTA vs 3.0% for CTA, p = 0.025; 13.2% for UTA vs 5.0% for CTA, p = 0.043; 10.2% for UTA vs 3.0% for CTA, p = 0.041, respectively). Conclusion For elderly individuals with IFFs who suffered a failed PFNA, CTA devices may have a noteworthy advantage in regard to the revision rate and the rate of key orthopaedic complications compared with UTA devices, and CTA revision should be performed as soon as possible, regardless of whether these individuals have symptoms.

scholarly journals Conversion from a failed proximal femoral nail anti-rotation to a cemented or uncemented total hip arthroplasty device: A retrospective review of 198 hips with previous intertrochanteric femur fractures

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weiguang Yu ◽  
Xiulan Han ◽  
Wenli Chen ◽  
Mao Shuai ◽  
Mingdong Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Complication Rate ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Elderly Individuals ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Femoral Nail ◽  
Uncemented Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background: At present, it is unclear which device ( uncemented or cemented total hip arthroplasty [UTA or CTA, respectively]) is more suitable for the conversion of a failed proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA). The aim of this review was to assess the outcomes of failed PFNAs converted to a UTA or CTA device in elderly individuals with intertrochanteric femoral fractures (IFFs) . Methods: Two hundred fifty-eight elderly individuals (258 hips) with IFFs who underwent a conversion to a UTA or CTA device following failed PFNAs during 2007-2017 were retrospectively identified from the China Southern Medical Centre (CSMC) database. The primary endpoint was the Harris Hip Score (HHS); secondary endpoint was the key orthopaedic complication rate. Results: The median follow-up was 65 months (60-69 months). Significant distinctions were observed (87.26±16.62 for UTA vs. 89.32±16.08 for CTA, p=0.021; 86.61±12.24 for symptomatic UTA vs. 88.68±13.30 for symptomatic CTA, p=0.026). A significant difference in the overall key orthopaedic complication rate was detected (40.8% [40/98] vs. 19.0% [19/100], p =0.001). Apparent distinctions were detected in terms of the rate of revision, loosening, and periprosthetic fracture (11.2% for UTA vs 3.0% for CTA, p = 0.025; 13.2% for UTA vs 5.0% for CTA, p = 0.043; 10.2% for UTA vs 3.0% for CTA, p = 0.041, respectively). Conclusion: For elderly individuals with IFFs who suffered a failed PFNA , CTA devices may have a noteworthy advantage in regard to functional scores and the rate of key orthopaedic complications compared with UTA devices, and CTA revision should be performed as soon as possible, regardless of whether these individuals have symptoms.

scholarly journals Conversion from a failed proximal femoral nail anti-rotation to a cemented or uncemented total hip arthroplasty device: A retrospective review of 198 hips with previous intertrochanteric femur fractures

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weiguang Yu ◽  
Xiulan Han ◽  
Wenli Chen ◽  
Mao Shuai ◽  
Mingdong Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Complication Rate ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Elderly Individuals ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Femoral Nail ◽  
Uncemented Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background: At present, it is unclear which device (uncemented or cemented total hip arthroplasty [UTA or CTA, respectively]) is more suitable for the conversion of a failed proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA). The aim of this review was to assess the outcomes of failed PFNAs converted to a UTA or CTA device in elderly individuals with intertrochanteric femoral fractures (IFFs).Methods: Two hundred fifty-eight elderly individuals (258 hips) with IFFs who underwent a conversion to a UTA or CTA device following failed PFNAs during 2007-2017 were retrospectively identified from the China Southern Medical Centre (CSMC) database. The primary endpoint was the Harris Hip Score (HHS); secondary endpoint was the key orthopaedic complication rate.Results: The median follow-up was 65 months (60-69 months). Significant distinctions were observed (87.26±16.62 for UTA vs. 89.32±16.08 for CTA, p=0.021; 86.61±12.24 for symptomatic UTA vs. 88.68±13.30 for symptomatic CTA, p=0.026). A significant difference in the overall key orthopaedic complication rate was detected (40.8% [40/98] vs. 19.0% [19/100], p=0.001). Apparent distinctions were detected in terms of the rate of revision, loosening, and periprosthetic fracture (11.2% for UTA vs 3.0% for CTA, p = 0.025; 13.2% for UTA vs 5.0% for CTA, p = 0.043; 10.2% for UTA vs 3.0% for CTA, p = 0.041, respectively).Conclusion: For elderly individuals with IFFs who suffered a failed PFNA, CTA devices may have a noteworthy advantage in regard to the revision rate functional scores and the rate of key orthopaedic complications compared with UTA devices, and CTA revision should be performed as soon as possible, regardless of whether these individuals have symptoms.

scholarly journals Conversion from a failed proximal femoral nail anti-rotation to a cemented or uncemented total hip arthroplasty device: A retrospective review of 198 hips with previous intertrochanteric femur fractures

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weiguang Yu ◽  
Xiulan Han ◽  
Wenli Chen ◽  
Mao Shuai ◽  
Mingdong Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Complication Rate ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Elderly Individuals ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Femoral Nail ◽  
Uncemented Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background: At present, it is unclear which device (uncemented or cemented total hip arthroplasty [UTA or CTA, respectively]) is more suitable for the conversion of a failed proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA). The aim of this review was to assess the outcomes of failed PFNAs converted to a UTA or CTA device in elderly individuals with intertrochanteric femoral fractures (IFFs).Methods: Two hundred fifty-eight elderly individuals (258 hips) with IFFs who underwent a conversion to a UTA or CTA device following failed PFNAs during 2007-2017 were retrospectively identified from the China Southern Medical Centre (CSMC) database. The primary endpoint was the Harris Hip Score (HHS); secondary endpoint was the key orthopaedic complication rate.Results: The median follow-up was 65 months (60-69 months). Significant distinctions were observed (87.26±16.62 for UTA vs. 89.32±16.08 for CTA, p=0.021; 86.61±12.24 for symptomatic UTA vs. 88.68±13.30 for symptomatic CTA, p=0.026). A significant difference in the overall key orthopaedic complication rate was detected (40.8% [40/98] vs. 19.0% [19/100], p=0.001). Apparent distinctions were detected in terms of the rate of revision, loosening, and periprosthetic fracture (11.2% for UTA vs 3.0% for CTA, p = 0.025; 13.2% for UTA vs 5.0% for CTA, p = 0.043; 10.2% for UTA vs 3.0% for CTA, p = 0.041, respectively).Conclusion: For elderly individuals with IFFs who suffered a failed PFNA, CTA devices seem to have a noteworthy advantage in regard to functional scores and the rate of key orthopaedic complications compared with UTA devices, and CTA revision should be performed as soon as possible, regardless of whether these individuals have symptoms.

Use of a monoblock dual-mobility acetabular component in primary total hip arthroplasty in patients at high risk of dislocation

2021 ◽  
pp. 112070002098846
Author(s):  
JaeWon Yang ◽  
Andrew J Bryan ◽  
Roman Drabchuk ◽  
Matthew W Tetreault ◽  
Tyler E Calkins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Acetabular Component ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Femoral Fracture ◽  
Acetabular Fracture ◽  
Periprosthetic Femoral Fracture ◽  
Dual Mobility ◽  
Total Hip

Introduction: Dislocation is amongst the most common complications following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Dual-mobility bearings have been suggested as one way to reduce the risk of dislocation, particularly among patients at increased risk. The purpose of this study was to determine the outcomes of a monoblock dual-mobility shell for patients at high risk for dislocation following primary THA. Methods: A total of 155 primary THAs with a monoblock, cementless dual-mobility acetabular component were performed in patients at high risk for dislocation. Two patients died prior to their two-year follow-up. The remaining 153 THAs were followed for a mean of 5.1 years (range: 2.1 to 9.3). Results: There were no dislocations; however, four patients underwent revision surgery: one for an early periprosthetic acetabular fracture, one for an early periprosthetic femoral fracture, one for a late periprosthetic femoral fracture, and one for leg-length discrepancy. Intraoperative complications included one periprosthetic acetabular fracture treated with protected weight-bearing and one intraoperative proximal femoral fracture treated with cerclage wiring. Harris Hip Scores improved from a mean of 42.4 points preoperatively to a mean of 82.4 points postoperatively ( p < 0.001). No cups were radiographically loose. At a mean follow-up of 5.1 years, survivorship of the acetabular component was 99.3% (95% CI, 98.1–100%) and survivorship without any reoperation was 97.4% (95% CI, 95.9–100%). Discussion: Although there were no dislocations in this high-risk population, periprosthetic fractures of the femur and acetabulum were common with the implants utilised.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document