scholarly journals Intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures at total hip arthroplasty. Review of classifications and treatment techniques

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-72
Author(s):  
E. V Polevoy ◽  
N. V Zagorodniy ◽  
S. V Kagramanov ◽  
G. A Chragyan ◽  
O. A Aleksanyan

The review covers the problem of intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures at total hip arthroplasty including the causes, classification and treatment techniques. This complication may occur at any step of the intervention, may differ by localization and pattern. All these will determine the preferable surgical treatment technique.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gianluca Scalici ◽  
Debora Boncinelli ◽  
Luigi Zanna ◽  
Roberto Buzzi ◽  
Laura Antonucci ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Periprosthetic fractures are challenging complication of hip arthroplasty and a rare injury, but their incidence is increasing. The surgical treatment is demanding to achieve early mobilization and avoid the complications of prolonged recumbency. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical outcomes of surgical treatment in periprosthetic femoral fractures of hip arthroplasty, making a comparison between implant revision and reduction and internal fixation of the fracture.Methods Authors retrospectively reviewed a series of 117 patients with total hip arthroplasty treated for periprosthetic femur fractures in the period between January 2013 and March 2018 at a single tertiary referral center. We collected the data of 70 patients who satisfied inclusion criteria. The fractures were classified according to the Unified Classification System (UCS) and randomized in two groups: reduction and internal fixation (G1) or revision arthroplasty (G2). Clinical outcomes were assessed with Oxford Hip Score post and pre-surgery, Barthel Score in relation to CIRS score (Cumulative illness rating scale), the type of fracture and post-operative complications with a minimum follow up of one year.Results Nominal univariable statistical analysis revealed significantly results concerning the difference between the post and pre-operative Oxford Hip Score (D Oxford) with type of treatment (p=0,008) and with the CIRS score (p=0,048). Moreover, we observed a strong significant relationship between type of treatment and type of fracture (P=0,0001). Multivariable analyses revealed that CIRS score was independently associated with Oxford Score improvement after surgery (P=0,024).Conclusions Authors reported how the surgical revision has a better functional outcome in B2 type of fracture than B1 or C, but the chosen treatment should be related to surgeon’s experience and patient’s comorbidities and a multidisciplinary team.


2019 ◽  
Vol 101-B (10) ◽  
pp. 1199-1208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan N. Lamb ◽  
Gulraj S. Matharu ◽  
Anthony Redmond ◽  
Andrew Judge ◽  
Robert M. West ◽  
...  

Aims We compared implant and patient survival following intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures (IOPFFs) during primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) with matched controls. Patients and Methods This retrospective cohort study compared 4831 hips with IOPFF and 48 154 propensity score matched primary THAs without IOPFF implanted between 2004 and 2016, which had been recorded on a national joint registry. Implant and patient survival rates were compared between groups using Cox regression. Results Ten-year stem survival was worse in the IOPFF group (p < 0.001). Risk of revision for aseptic loosening increased 7.2-fold following shaft fracture and almost 2.8-fold after trochanteric fracture (p < 0.001). Risk of periprosthetic fracture of the femur revision increased 4.3-fold following calcar-crack and 3.6-fold after trochanteric fracture (p < 0.01). Risk of instability revision was 3.6-fold after trochanteric fracture and 2.4-fold after calcar crack (p < 0.001). Risk of 90-day mortality following IOPFF without revision was 1.7-fold and 4.0-fold after IOPFF with early revision surgery versus uncomplicated THA (p < 0.001). Conclusion IOPFF increases risk of stem revision and mortality up to ten years following surgery. The risk of revision depends on IOPFF subtype and mortality risk increases with subsequent revision surgery. Surgeons should carefully diagnose and treat IOPFF to minimize fracture progression and implant failure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1199–1208


2009 ◽  
Vol 80 (5) ◽  
pp. 548-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toby W Briant-Evans ◽  
Darmaraja Veeramootoo ◽  
Eleftherios Tsiridis ◽  
Matthew J Hubble

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 556-567 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas E. Ohly ◽  
Michael R. Whitehouse ◽  
Clive P. Duncan

Injury ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. S45-S51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vito Pavone ◽  
Claudia de Cristo ◽  
Antonio Di Stefano ◽  
Luciano Costarella ◽  
Gianluca Testa ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document