Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures in Total Hip Arthroplasty – a Review

Rayan, Faizal; Haddad, Fares S.

doi:10.1177/112070001002000402

Cited by 32 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The traditional approach to the treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the proximal femur with a stable implanted hip prosthesis involves the use of unicortical locking plates at the level of the prosthesis [1][2][3][4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different thermal conductivity in drilling of cemented compared with cementless hip prostheses in the treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the proximal femur—an experimental biomechanical analysis

Brand

Klotz²,

Hassel³

et al. 2013

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the different temperature levels whilst drilling cemented and cementless hip prostheses implanted in bovine femora, and to evaluate the insulating function of the cement layer. Methods Standard hip prostheses were implanted in bovine donor diaphyses, with or without a cement layer. Drilling was then performed using high-performance-cutting drills with a reinforced core, a drilling diameter of 5.5 mm and cooling channels through the tip of the drill for constantly applied internal cooling solution. An open type cooling model was used in this setup. Temperature was continuously measured by seven thermocouples placed around the borehole. Thermographic scans were also performed during drilling. Results At the cemented implant surface, the temperature never surpassed 24.7°C when constantly applied internal cooling was used. Without the insulating cement layer (i.e. during drilling of the cementless bone-prosthesis construct), the temperature increased to 47°C. Conclusion Constantly applied internal cooling can avoid structural bone and soft tissue damage during drilling procedures. With a cement layer, the temperatures only increased to non-damaging levels. The results could be useful in the treatment of periprosthetic fractures with intraprosthetic implant fixation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different thermal conductivity in drilling of cemented compared with cementless hip prostheses in the treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the proximal femur—an experimental biomechanical analysis

Brand

Klotz²,

Hassel³

et al. 2013

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Die Diskussion ! Vancouver-Typ-B1-und -Typ-C-Frakturen mit stabil einliegender Prothese sollten plattenosteosynthetisch versorgt werden [3,5,10]. Gleiches gilt für die Therapie stabiler diaphysärer periprothetischer Humerusschaftfrakturen [11][12][13].…”

Section: Lap-variantenunclassified

“…Zu den Risikofaktoren zählen sowohl hohes Alter, weibliches Geschlecht, Osteopenie und Begleiterkrankungen als auch Implantatauswahl und Operationstechnik [4]. Postoperativ liegen der PPF häufig niederenergetischen Traumata zugrunde [5] …”

unclassified

Locking Attachment Plate – Erste Erfahrungen

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Periprosthetic fractures are an increasingly common complication in old, often multi-morbid patients. A contemporary therapeutic intervention and early postoperative mobilisation contribute substantially to the success of treatment. The first results in the use of the LAP as a new implant option for periprosthetic fractures of the femur, tibia and humerus are promising. Further studies are necessary to show whether our overall good results are reproducible in larger groups of patients and whether the LAP can be given a firm position in the technical repertoire for treatment of periprosthetic fractures.

show abstract

“…Intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures (IPFF) have been studied extensively for total hip arthroplasties, and revision surgery of THA shows the higher risk for this complication [1]. In a large cohort study, it was reported that IPFF were encountered during 1% (238) of 23,980 primary THA compared with 7.8% (497) of 6349 revisions [2], and other studies have shown similar results [3][4][5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Intraoperative Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Related to Austin Moore Hemiarthroplasty—A Retrospective Review of 365 Patients

Fernández-Valencia¹,

Llobet²,

Pons³

et al. 2013

OJO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures (IPFF) have been studied extensively for total hip arthroplasties, but not for hemiarthroplasties. Recent series in the literature show an IPFF rate for hemiarthroplasties ranging from 0% to 14%. The present study was designed to determine the prevalence and outcome after IPFF during non-cemented hemiarthroplasty. In addition, the surgical step at higher risk to produce these fractures was evaluated in an attempt to identify strategies that could minimize the prevalence of this complication. We performed an observational study of 365 consecutive patients undergoing and Austin-Moore hemiarthroplasty from 2005 to 2006 at our institution. The institutional IPFF rate was 6.8% (twenty-five out of 365). The moment at which the fracture was detected was collected: 1) intraoperatively and 2) in the postoperative radiological control. The surgical step in which the fracture occurred was collected: 1) neck osteotomy, 2) broaching, 3) prosthesis introduction, and 4) reduction. Results were compared to a control group according to blood transfusion rate, mortality rate and revision surgery rate. The fractures were detected during the surgery in twenty cases (80%); for the five remaining cases the fracture was only detected in the postoperative radiology. For those detected during the surgery, the two most common manouvers in which the fracture occurred was hip reduction (10 cases) and prosthesis introduction (7 cases). The blood transfusion rate, first-month mortality rate and revision surgery rate showed no statistical difference between the two groups (p = 0.3). In the present series, most of IPFF during Austin-Moore hemiarthroplasty implantation, occurred during arthroplasty reduction. Difficulties during this step should lead the surgeon to reconsider if technical mistakes are present and can be solved. However, if fracture occurs, adequate treatment of IPFF should provide satisfactory results without increasing blood transfusion needs, mortality or revision surgery.

show abstract

Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures in Total Hip Arthroplasty – a Review

Cited by 32 publications

References 39 publications

Different thermal conductivity in drilling of cemented compared with cementless hip prostheses in the treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the proximal femur—an experimental biomechanical analysis

Different thermal conductivity in drilling of cemented compared with cementless hip prostheses in the treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the proximal femur—an experimental biomechanical analysis

Locking Attachment Plate – Erste Erfahrungen

Intraoperative Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Related to Austin Moore Hemiarthroplasty—A Retrospective Review of 365 Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About