Complications and survival of conversion to total hip arthroplasty after failed primary osteosynthesis compared to primary total hip arthroplasty in femoral neck fractures

Leent, Eelco A.P. van; Schmitz, Peter P; Jong, Lex D. de; Zuurmond, Rutger G; Vos, C.J.; Susante, Job L C van; Somford, Matthijs P.

doi:10.1016/j.injury.2022.02.033

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The disadvantages of a conversion arthroplasty in terms of poorer surgical results than primary arthroplasty [7,23] is questioned by some studies [24][25][26]. Regardless, the main concern must be the loss of health-related quality-of-life during the period leading up to conversion arthroplasty [7].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The 1-and 5-year mortality was 6% (CI 4-9) and 20% (CI [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] in the IF group and 3% (CI 2-5) and 23% (CI 20-28) in the THA group, respectively (Tables 2 and 3).…”

Section: Mortalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For primary THA, the 5-year rate of revision was 4.0% (CI 2.8-5.8). The 5-year mortality did not differ, being 20% (CI [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] and 23% (CI 20-28) after IF and THA, respectively. Regression analyses did not identify any risk factors for conversion arthroplasty based on the variables in the register.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The different strategies in treating displaced femoral neck fractures: mid-term surgical outcome in a register-based cohort of 1,283 patients aged 60–69 years

Lagergren,

Strøm Rönnquist,

Wolf

et al. 2023

ActaO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and purpose: In patients around retirement age controversy exists as to whether to treat displaced femoral neck fracture (dFNF) with internal fixation (IF) or arthroplasty. An arthroplasty in this age group may need revision due to a long expected remaining lifetime. IF carries a higher risk of early failure but a maintained native hip if healing occurs. We aimed to determine the cumulative 5-year rate of conversion to arthroplasty after IF and implant revision after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), respectively.Patients and methods: In this longitudinal cohort study, patients aged 60–69 years registered with a dFNF in the Swedish Fracture Register (SFR) 2012–2018 were cross-referenced with available data from the Swedish Arthroplasty Register (SAR) until December 31, 2019. Conversion to arthroplasty or revision were analyzed utilizing competing risk, with death as competing event.Results: At 5 years, the cumulative rate of conversion to arthroplasty after IF was 31% (95% confidence interval [CI] 26–37). For primary THA, the 5-year rate of revision was 4.0% (CI 2.8–5.8). The 5-year mortality did not differ, being 20% (CI 16–27) and 23% (CI 20–28) after IF and THA, respectively. Regression analyses did not identify any risk factors for conversion arthroplasty based on the variables in the register.Conclusion: A follow-up of 5 years catches most reoperations after IF, resulting in a 31% conversion rate. The 4% revision rate at 5 years after primary THA should be seen as an intermediate result, as late complications may occur.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mortalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The different strategies in treating displaced femoral neck fractures: mid-term surgical outcome in a register-based cohort of 1,283 patients aged 60–69 years

Lagergren,

Strøm Rönnquist,

Wolf

et al. 2023

ActaO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The treatment of femoral neck fractures is currently based on arthroplasty and repositioned internal fixation [ 8 ].However, complications such as non-union of the fracture and ischemic necrosis of the femoral head occur more commonly after common internal fixation, which will seriously affect the functional recovery of patients after surgery and lead to secondary surgery. How to reduce the complications of the femoral neck fracture internal fixation have always been a problem that plagues clinicians and the research of many scholars [ 9 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic-assisted systems for the safe and reliable treatment of femoral neck fractures: retrospective cohort study

Wang,

Zhang,

Lou

et al. 2023

J Orthop Surg Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Robots are being used in a wide range of surgical procedures. However, in clinical practice, the efficacy of orthopedic robotic-assisted treatment of femoral neck fractures is still poorly reported, particularly in terms of screw placement accuracy, femoral neck fracture healing rates and postoperative functional recovery. Moreover, there is a lack of comparative analysis between robot-assisted surgery and traditional surgical approaches. Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients with femoral neck fractures treated with TiRobot-assisted hollow screw fixation with those of patients with femoral neck fractures treated with traditional surgical approaches. Methods This study included 112 patients with femoral neck fracture who were treated from March 2017 to October 2021 with percutaneous hollow screw internal fixation. These included 56 cases in the TiRobot-assisted surgery group and 56 cases in the standard surgery group. After at least 1 year of follow-up, the treatment outcomes of the two groups were compared, including the amount of intraoperative bleeding, the duration of intraoperative fluoroscopy, the number of guide pin positioning adjustments, the length of hospital stay, the accuracy rate of screw placement, the final Harris Hip Score, the fracture healing rate, and the rate of femoral head necrosis. Statistical analysis software was used to process and analyze the result. Results The TiRobot-assisted group had a statistically significant improvement over the control group in terms of intraoperative bleeding, the duration of intraoperative fluoroscopy, the number of guide pin positioning adjustments, length of hospital stay, accuracy of screw placement and incidence of femoral head necrosis (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in time to surgery, final Harris hip score and fracture healing rate (P > 0.05). Conclusion This study shows that TiRobot-assisted surgery has the advantages of short hospital stay, high safety, minimally invasive, high success rate of nail placement, and can reduce the amount of intraoperative radiation and the incidence of femoral head necrosis, thus achieving satisfactory clinical outcomes, and is worthy of clinical promotion.

show abstract

Predictors of Reoperation and Survival Experience (Minimum 1 Year) for Primary Versus Conversion Total Hip Arthroplasty in Young Patients

Szapary,

Desai,

Farid

et al. 2024

The Journal of Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Complications and survival of conversion to total hip arthroplasty after failed primary osteosynthesis compared to primary total hip arthroplasty in femoral neck fractures

Cited by 4 publications

References 28 publications

The different strategies in treating displaced femoral neck fractures: mid-term surgical outcome in a register-based cohort of 1,283 patients aged 60–69 years

The different strategies in treating displaced femoral neck fractures: mid-term surgical outcome in a register-based cohort of 1,283 patients aged 60–69 years

Robotic-assisted systems for the safe and reliable treatment of femoral neck fractures: retrospective cohort study

Predictors of Reoperation and Survival Experience (Minimum 1 Year) for Primary Versus Conversion Total Hip Arthroplasty in Young Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About