Fracture fixation versus revision arthroplasty in Vancouver type B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures: a systematic review.
ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Hip arthroplasty (HA) is commonly performed to treat various hip pathologies. Its volume is expected to rise further due to the increasing age of the population. Complication rates are low; however, periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFF) are a rare, albeit serious, complication with substantial economic impact. While current guidelines propose revision with long-stemmed prostheses for all Vancouver B2 and B3 PFF, some recent research papers suggest that open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) could lead to an equivalent outcome. Our aim was to summarize the evidence, elucidating under which circumstances ORIF leads to a favorable outcome after B2 and B3 PFF compared with revision surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS:A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies on patients treated with ORIF and with stem revision after B2 and/or B3 fractures. Extracted information included initial pathology, stem fixation mechanism, bone quality and stem stability at the time of PFF, clinical outcomes, and mortality. Results of individual studies were summarized in a table in lieu of a quantitative data synthesis due to a lack of standardized information. RESULTS:We identified 14 original research articles including both patients treated with ORIF and with stem revision after B2 and/or B3 PFF. Five studies included statistical comparisons, all were in favor of ORIF or indeterminate. The common lack of rigorous statistical analyses and significant methodological weaknesses made identification of outcome predictors impossible. CONCLUSION:The choice of treatment modality for PFF depends on fracture, implant, and bone characteristics. Recent data show that successful outcome can be achieved without revising loose stems. ORIF may be a viable option if bone stock is adequate around uncemented or tapered polished stems with an intact cement mantle and the fracture geometry allows stable anatomic reconstruction. Conceptional considerations support this idea, but more data are needed to identify outcome predictors.
Project description:An anatomical reconstruction of the ankle congruity is the important prerequisite in the operative treatment of acute ankle fractures. Despite anatomic restoration patients regularly suffer from residual symptoms after these fractures. There is growing evidence, that a poor outcome is related to the concomitant traumatic intra-articular pathology. By supplementary ankle arthroscopy anatomic reduction can be confirmed and associated intra-articular injuries can be treated. Nevertheless, the vast majority of complex ankle fractures are managed by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) only. Up to now, the effectiveness of arthroscopically assisted fracture treatment (AORIF) has not been conclusively determined. Therefore, a prospective randomised study is needed to sufficiently evaluate the effect of AORIF compared to ORIF in complex ankle fractures.We perform a randomised controlled trial at Munich University Clinic enrolling patients (18-65 years) with an acute ankle fracture (AO 44 A2, A3, B2, B3, C1 - C3 according to AO classification system). Patients meeting the inclusion criteria are randomised to either intervention group (AORIF, n?=?37) or comparison group (ORIF, n?=?37). Exclusion criteria are fractures classified as AO type 44 A1 or B1, pilon or plafond-variant injury or open fractures. Primary outcome is the AOFAS Score (American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society). Secondary outcome parameter are JSSF Score (Japanese Society of Surgery of the Foot), Olerud and Molander Score, Karlsson Score, Tegner Activity Scale, SF-12, radiographic analysis, arthroscopic findings of intra-articular lesions, functional assessments, time to return to work/sports and complications. This study protocol is accordant to the SPIRIT 2013 recommendation. Statistical analysis will be performed using SPSS 22.0 (IBM).The subjective and functional outcome of complex ankle fractures is regularly unsatisfying. As these injuries are very common it is essential to improve the postoperative results. Potentially, arthroscopically assisted fracture treatment can significantly improve the outcome by addressing the intra-articular pathologies. Given the absolute lack of studies comparing AORIF to ORIF in complex ankle fractures, this randomised controlled trail is urgently needed to evaluate the effectiveness of additional arthroscopy.ClinicalTrials.gov reference: NCT02449096 (Trial registration date: April 7th, 2015).
Project description:Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is standard care for most acetabular fractures. With increasing numbers of acetabular fractures in the elderly, the risk of revision surgery and conversion to total hip replacement (THR) is increasing. Alarmingly, about 20-25% of acetabular fractures in the elderly following ORIF needed revision and conversion to delayed THR.Recently, prognostic factors have been identified, which correlate with an increased risk of worse outcomes following ORIF of acetabular fractures in the elderly patient. Patient risk factors include, for example, age, comorbidities, and degree of osteoporosis. Injury risk factors mainly include the fracture pattern.The concept of primary THR following acetabular fractures is an alternative to ORIF, especially in the elderly patient. Satisfactory outcomes have been reported in different studies for primary THR following acetabular fractures in the elderly. The surgeon should be aware of strict selection criteria in order to achieve these satisfactory outcomes. Therefore, an individualized treatment plan has to be defined for elderly patients following acetabular fractures.Here, the advantages and disadvantages of ORIF versus THR following acetabular fractures in the elderly are discussed.
Project description:Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is indicated for completely displaced femoral neck fractures (FNF) in elderly community ambulators. Compared to open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) and hemiarthroplasty (HA), THA has favorable outcomes in this population. Cementless fixation with prophylactic cabling is the technique of choice. THA is costlier for hip fractures than for osteoarthritis, but is cost effective for FNF given its lower rate of revision than HA or ORIF. Postoperative home discharge with a home exercise program in appropriate patients may effectively control costs while optimizing outcome.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Almost one-third of patients with proximal humeral fractures are treated surgically, and the number is increasing. When surgical treatment is chosen, there is sparse evidence on the optimum method. The DelPhi (Delta prosthesis-PHILOS plate) trial is a clinical trial comparing 2 surgical treatments. Our hypothesis was that reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) yields better clinical results compared with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using an angular stable plate. METHODS:The DelPhi trial is a randomized controlled trial comparing reverse TSA with ORIF for displaced proximal humeral fractures (OTA/AO types 11-B2 and 11-C2) in elderly patients (65 to 85 years of age). The primary outcome measure was the Constant score at a 2-year follow-up. The secondary outcome measures included the Oxford Shoulder Score and radiographic evaluation. Results were reported as the mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI). The intention-to-treat principle was applied for crossover patients. RESULTS:There were 124 patients included in the study. At 2 years, the mean Constant score was 68.0 points (95% CI, 63.7 to 72.4 points) for the reverse TSA group compared with 54.6 points (95% CI, 48.5 to 60.7 points) for the ORIF group, resulting in a significant mean difference of 13.4 points (95% CI, 6.2 to 20.6 points; p < 0.001) in favor of reverse TSA. When stratified for fracture classification, the mean score was 69.3 points (95% CI, 63.9 to 74.7 points) for the reverse TSA group and 50.6 points (95% CI, 41.9 to 59.2 points) for the ORIF group for type-C2 fractures, which yielded a significant mean difference of 18.7 points (95% CI, 9.3 to 28.2 points; p < 0.001). In the type-B2 fracture group, the mean score was 66.2 points (95% CI, 58.6 to 73.8 points) for the reverse TSA group and 58.5 points (95% CI, 49.6 to 67.4 points) for the ORIF group, resulting in a nonsignificant mean difference of 7.6 points (95% CI, -3.8 to 19.1 points; p = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS:At a 2-year follow-up, the data suggested an advantage of reverse TSA over ORIF in the treatment of displaced OTA/AO type-B2 and C2 proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Project description:BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Historically, the treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) has been associated with a high frequency of complications and reoperations. The preferred treatment is internal fixation, a revision of the femoral stem, or a combination of both. An improved understanding of plate use during internal fixation, and the introduction of locking-plate osteosynthesis may lead to improved outcome. We evaluated the outcome of Vancouver type B1 and C PFFs treated by locking-plate osteosynthesis, by assessing rates of fracture union and reoperations and by analyzing failure cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 2002 through 2011, 58 consecutive patients (60 fractures) with low-energy PFF around or below a stable femoral stem, i.e. Vancouver type B1 and C fractures, underwent osteosynthesis with a locking plate. All patients had a total hip replacement (THR). They were followed up clinically and radiographically, with 6 weeks between visits, until fracture union or until death. Fracture union was evaluated 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: At a median follow-up time of 23 (0-121) months after PFF, 8 patients (8 fractures) had been reoperated due either to infection (n = 4), failure of fixation (n = 3), or loosening of the femoral stem (n = 1). All the patients who had been followed up for at least 6 months-and who did not undergo reoperation or die-went on to fracture union (n = 43). INTERPRETATION: Locking-plate osteosynthesis of periprosthetic Vancouver type B1 and C fractures gives good results regarding fracture union. It appears that spanning of the prosthesis to avoid stress-rising areas is important for successful treatment. Infection is the major cause of failure.
Project description:To examine the mortality and implant survivorship of proximal femoral replacement (PFR), revision total hip arthroplasty (REV) and open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) in the treatment of acute periprosthetic fractures of the proximal femur, we retrospectively reviewed 97 consecutive acute periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures from 2000 to 2010. Three groups were defined: PFR (n=21), REV (n=19), and ORIF (n=57). Outcome measures were all-cause mortality, implant failure, and reoperation. Competing Risks survival analysis of overall mortality during the mean 35-month follow-up showed no statistical difference between the three groups (P=0.65; 12 and 60 month mortality for PFR: 37%, 45%; REV: 16%, 46%; ORIF: 14%, 100%). Implant survival was worse for the PFR group (P=0.03, 12 and 60-month implant failure rate for PFR: 5%, 39%; REV: 7%, 7%; ORIF 2%, 2%). We conclude that PFR as compared with REV or ORIF may have worse medium-term implant survival, primarily due to instability and dislocation.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Proximal humeral fractures can be treated non-operatively or operatively with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and arthroplasty. Our objective was to assess practice patterns for operative and non-operative treatment of proximal humeral fractures. We also report on complications, readmissions, in-hospital mortality, and need for surgery after initial treatment of proximal humeral fractures in California, Florida, and New York. METHODS:The State Inpatient Databases and State Emergency Department Databases from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, were used for the states of California (2005-2011), Florida (2005-2014), and New York (2008-2014). Data on patients with proximal humeral fractures was extracted. Patients underwent non-operative or operative (ORIF or arthroplasty) treatment at baseline and were followed for at least 4 years from the index presentation. If the patient needed subsequent surgery, time to event was calculated in days, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were plotted. RESULTS:At the index visit, 90.3% of patients with proximal humeral fractures had non-operative treatment, 6.7% had ORIF, and 3.0% had arthroplasty. 7.6% of patients initially treated non-operatively, 6.6% initially treated with ORIF, and 7.2% initially treated with arthroplasty needed surgery during follow-up. Device complications were the primary reason for readmission in 5.3% of ORIF patients and 6.7% of arthroplasty patients (p < 0.0001). All-cause in-hospital mortality was 9.8% for patients managed non-operatively, 8.8% for ORIF, and 10.0% for arthroplasty (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS:A majority of patients with proximal humeral fractures underwent non-operative treatment. There was a relatively high all-cause in-hospital mortality irrespective of treatment. Given the recent debate on operative versus non-operative treatment for proximal humeral fractures, our study provides valuable information on the need for revision surgery after initial treatment. The differences in rates of revision surgery between patients treated non-operatively, with ORIF, and with arthroplasty were small in magnitude. At nine years of follow-up, ORIF had the lowest probability of needing follow-up surgery, and arthroplasty had the highest.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Both-bone forearm fractures are a common fracture, accounting for 3.4% of all paediatric fractures. For now, elastic stable intramedullary nailing (ESIN) and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) are the common surgical procedures for paediatric both-bone forearm fractures. Both ORIF and ESIN have their shortcomings. Therefore, we need to find another surgical treatment which can decrease the rate of complications and improve the clinical efficacy. Our study plans to test hybrid fixation, using an ESIN fixation for the radius and an ORIF for the ulna. Our study will conduct a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing double plate fixation with hybrid fixation for treatment of both-bone forearm fractures in older children between 10 and 16?years of age. The objectives of this trial are to compare the effectiveness between double plate fixation and hybrid fixation for treatment of both-bone forearm fractures in older children. METHODS:An RCT will be conducted, and the participants included will be randomly divided into either the hybrid fixation group or the double plate fixation group, at a ratio of 1:1. The primary clinical outcome measures are the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score and radiological evaluation. Secondary clinical outcome measures are intraoperative blood loss, surgical duration, visual analogue scale score after surgery, hospital duration after surgery and complications. Follow-up will be conducted at 2?weeks and 1, 3, 6 and 12?months postoperatively. DISCUSSION:The trial will provide a new surgical treatment for forearm fractures in older children. Our hypothesis is that there is no clinically relevant difference in the primary outcome measures between the two treatment groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR1800018060. Registered on 26 August 2018.
Project description:Background and purpose - Recent studies have demonstrated a high incidence of postoperative periprosthetic femoral fracture (PPF) in elderly patients treated with 2 commonly used cemented, polished tapered stems. We compared the prevalence and incidence rate of PPF in a consecutive cohort of octagenerians with femoral neck fractures (FNFs) treated with either a collarless, polished tapered (CPT) stem or an anatomic matte stem (Lubinus SP2). Patients and methods - In a multicenter, prospective cohort study, we included 979 hips in patients aged 80 years and above (72% females, median age 86 (80-102) years) with a femoral neck fracture as indication for surgery. 69% of the patients were classified as ASA class 3 or 4. Hip-related complications and repeat surgery were assessed at a median follow-up of 20 (0-24) months postoperatively. Results - 22 hips (2.2%) sustained a PPF at a median of 7 (0-22) months postoperatively; 14 (64%) were Vancouver B2 fractures. 7 of the 22 surgically treated fractures required revision surgery, mainly due to deep infection. The cumulative incidence of PPFs was 3.8% in the CPT group, as compared with 0.2% in the SP2 group (p < 0.001). The risk ratio (RR) was 16 (95% CI: 2-120) using the SP2 group as denominator. Interpretation - The CPT stem was associated with a higher risk of PPF than the SP2 stem. We suggest that the tapered CPT stem should not be used for the treatment of femoral neck fractures in patients over 80 years.
Project description:<b>Background: </b>Bone-graft substitutes are commonly used for the augmentation of traumatic bone defects in tibial plateau fractures. However, their clinical performance compared with that of autologous bone-grafting, the gold standard in bone defect reconstruction, still remains under debate. This study investigates the differences in quality of life, pain, and radiographic outcomes in the treatment of tibial plateau fracture-associated bone defects with either autologous bone grafts or a bioresorbable hydroxyapatite and calcium sulfate cement (CERAMENT BONE VOID FILLER [CBVF]; BONESUPPORT).<br><br><b>Methods: </b>In this study, 135 patients with acute depression and split-depression fractures of the proximal part of the tibia (OTA/AO types 41-B2 and 41-B3) were enrolled in a prospective, controlled, randomized, multicenter trial including 20 hospitals in Germany. Patients were randomized to receive either autologous iliac bone graft or CBVF for reconstruction of the bone defect. The primary outcome measures were the Short Form (SF)-12 version 2 Physical Component Summary (PCS) score at week 26 (the study was designed to show noninferiority of the CBVF with regard to the PCS with a prespecified margin of -5 points) and the pain level at 26 weeks postoperatively measured by a visual analog scale (VAS). The secondary outcomes were the SF-12 version 2 Mental Component Summary (MCS) and SF-12 PCS scores at weeks 1, 6, and 12 and bone-healing on radiographs.<br><br><b>Results: </b>Age, sex, fixation methods, and fracture pattern were comparable in both groups. There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the SF-12 PCS or VAS scores at postoperative week 26. There was a significant reduction of blood loss (p = 0.007) and pain levels (p = 0.008) at postoperative day 1 in the CBVF group. The rates of fracture-healing, defect remodeling, and articular subsidence were not significantly different (p > 0.05) in both groups.<br><br><b>Conclusions: </b>Bioresorbable CBVF was noninferior to autologous bone graft with regard to both patient-reported and radiographic outcomes in tibial plateau fractures of OTA/AO types 41-B2 and 41-B3.<br><br><b>Level of evidence: </b>Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.