Peri-implant femoral fractures: Challenges, outcomes, and proposal of a treatment algorithm

被引:9
作者
Bidolegui, Fernando [1 ]
Pereira, Sebastian [1 ]
Munera, Mateo Alzate [1 ]
Garabano, German [2 ]
Pesciallo, Cesar A. [2 ]
Pires, Robinson Esteves [3 ]
Giordano, Vincenzo [4 ]
机构
[1] Sirio Libanes Hosp, Orthopaed & Trauma Surg Dept, Buenos Aires, Argentina
[2] British Hosp Buenos Aires, Orthopaed & Trauma Surg Dept, Buenos Aires, Argentina
[3] Univ Fed Minas Gerais, Dept Locomotor Apparat, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
[4] Hosp Municipal Miguel Couto, Orthoped & Traumatol Prof Nova Monteiro, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil
关键词
Peri-implant femoral fracture; Peri-osteosynthesis fracture; Femur fracture; Treatment algorithm; HIP-FRACTURES; OVERLAP; RISK;
D O I
10.1016/j.cjtee.2022.10.001
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose: Non-prosthetic peri-implant fractures are challenging injuries. Multiple factors must be care-fully evaluated for an adequate therapeutic strategy, such as the state of bone healing, the type of implant, the time and performed personnel of previous surgery, and the stability of fixation. The aim of this study is to propose a rationale for the treatment.Methods: The peri-implant femoral fractures (PIFFs) system, a therapeutic algorithm was developed for the management of all patients presenting a subtype A PIFF, based on the type of the original implant (extra-vs. intra-medullary), implant length and fracture location. The adequacy and reliability of the proposed algorithm and the fracture healing process were assessed at the last clinical follow-up using the Parker mobility score and radiological assessment, respectively. In addition, all complications were noticed. Continuous variables were expressed as mean and standard deviation, or median and range according to their distribution. Categorical variables were expressed as frequency and percentages.Results: This is a retrospective case series of 33 PIFFs, and the mean post-operative Parker mobility score was (5.60 & PLUSMN; 2.54) points. Five patients (15.1%) achieved complete mobility without aids (9 points) and 1 (3.0%) patient was not able to walk. Two other patients (6.1%) were non-ambulatory prior to PPIF. The mean follow-up was (21.51 & PLUSMN; 9.12) months (range 6 -48 months). There were 7 (21.2%) complications equally distributed between patients managed either with nailing or plating. There were no cases of nonunion or mechanical failure of the original implant.Conclusion: The proposed treatment algorithm shows adequate, reliable and straightforward to assist the orthopaedic trauma surgeon on the difficult decision-making process regarding the management of PIFF occurring in previously healed fractures. In addition, it may become a useful tool to optimize the use of the classification, thus potentially improving the outcomes and minimizing complications.& COPY; 2022 Chinese Medical Association. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:211 / 216
页数:6
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]   Non-prosthetic peri-implant fractures: classification, management and outcomes [J].
Chan, Lester W. M. ;
Gardner, Antony W. ;
Wong, Merng Koon ;
Chua, Kenon ;
Kwek, Ernest B. K. .
ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2018, 138 (06) :791-802
[2]   HIP-FRACTURES IN THE ELDERLY - A WORLDWIDE PROJECTION [J].
COOPER, C ;
CAMPION, G ;
MELTON, LJ .
OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL, 1992, 2 (06) :285-289
[3]   Previous Implant Fractures: A New Descriptive Classification System [J].
Egol, Kenneth A. ;
Carlock, Kurtis D. ;
Kelly, Erin A. ;
Seetharam, Abhijit ;
Mullis, Brian H. ;
Marcantonio, Andrew J. ;
Bramlett, Kasey J. ;
Nchako, Corbyn M. ;
Watson, J. Tracy ;
Cannada, Lisa K. ;
Konda, Sanjit R. .
JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA, 2019, 33 (09) :423-427
[4]   Risk factors for periprosthetic femoral fracture [J].
Franklin, John ;
Malchau, Henrik .
INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED, 2007, 38 (06) :655-660
[5]   How are peri-implant fractures below short versus long cephalomedullary nails different? [J].
Goodnough, L. Henry ;
Salazar, Brett P. ;
Furness, Jamie ;
Feng, James E. ;
DeBaun, Malcolm R. ;
Campbell, Sean T. ;
Lucas, Justin F. ;
Cross, William W. ;
Leucht, Philipp ;
Grant, Kevin D. ;
Gardner, Michael J. ;
Bishop, Julius A. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2021, 31 (03) :421-427
[6]   The effect of implant overlap on the mechanical properties of the femur [J].
Harris, T ;
Ruth, JT ;
Szivek, J ;
Haywood, B .
JOURNAL OF TRAUMA-INJURY INFECTION AND CRITICAL CARE, 2003, 54 (05) :930-935
[7]   Peri-implant femoral fractures in hip fracture patients treated with osteosynthesis: a retrospective cohort study of 1965 patients [J].
Kruse, Mark ;
Mohammed, Jabbar ;
Sayed-Noor, Arkan ;
Wolf, Olof ;
Holmgren, Gunnar ;
Nordstrom, Robin ;
Crnalic, Sead ;
Skoldenberg, Olof ;
Mukka, Sebastian .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF TRAUMA AND EMERGENCY SURGERY, 2022, 48 (01) :293-298
[8]   Does the Lateral Plate need to Overlap the Stem to Mitigate Stress Concentration When Treating Vancouver C Periprosthetic Supracondylar Femur Fracture? [J].
Kubiak, Erik N. ;
Haller, Justin M. ;
Kemper, Dan D. ;
Presson, Angela P. ;
Higgins, Thomas F. ;
Horwitz, Daniel S. .
JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2015, 30 (01) :104-108
[9]  
Lanzetti Riccardo Maria, 2018, Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol, V28, P649, DOI [10.1007/s00590-018-2143-9, 10.1007/s00590-018-2143-9]
[10]   What is the risk of stress risers for interprosthetic fractures of the femur? A biomechanical analysis [J].
Lehmann, Wolfgang ;
Rupprecht, Martin ;
Nuechtern, Jacob ;
Melzner, Daniel ;
Sellenschloh, Kai ;
Kolb, Jan ;
Fensky, Florian ;
Hoffmann, Michael ;
Pueschel, Klaus ;
Morlock, Michael ;
Rueger, Johannes M. .
INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2012, 36 (12) :2441-2446