Search

Introduction: The increase in hip arthroplasties predicts a rise in periprosthetic fractures in Morocco, posing challenges for orthopedic surgeons. Therapeutic strategies vary considerably, highlighting the absence of a universally accepted treatment protocol., Aim: To analyze the management of per-prosthetic hip fractures, while addressing the challenges associated with them., Methods: This was a retrospective study, conducted in the trauma-orthopedics department between December 2015 and November 2022. Nineteen patients who presented to the hospital with fractures around a hip prosthesis were included., Result: Nineteen periprosthetic fractures were observed. The majority of patients (68%) were women, with an average age of 68. The Vancouver classification showed that 52.6% of the fractures were type B1, and 21.1% type C, while the other fracture types were distributed differently. These fractures were mainly associated with diagnoses such as femoral neck fracture (63.2%) and coxarthrosis (31.6%). We observed variations in treatment recommendations and results between the different series analyzed. We noted discrepancies with certain series concerning fracture types and therapeutic choices. However, in our series, we achieved satisfactory results, with successful consolidation and the absence of complications in all patients., Conclusion: These results underline the importance of an individualized approach to fracture management, taking into account the specificities of each case.

Background: Periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) represent a major cause for surgical revision after hip arthroplasty with detrimental consequences for patients. The Vancouver classification has been traditionally used since its introduction in 1995. The Unified Classification System (UCS) was described in 2014, to widen the spectrum by aiming for a more comprehensive approach. The UCS also aimed to replace the Vancouver classification by expanding the idea of the Vancouver classification to the whole musculoskeletal apparatus. After introduction of the UCS, the question was raised, whether the UCS found its place in the field of analysing PFFs. Therefore, this systematic review was performed to investigate, the use of the UCS compared to the established Vancouver classification., Methods: Medline was searched for reports published between 1 January 2016 and 31 November 2020, without language restriction. Included were original articles, irrespective of the level of evidence and case reports reporting on a PFF and using either the Vancouver or the UCS to classify the fractures. Excluded were reviews and systematic reviews., Results: One hundred forty-six studies were included in the analysis. UCS has not been used in a single registry study, giving a pooled cohort size of 3299 patients, compared to 59,178 patients in studies using the Vancouver classification. Since 2016, one study using UCS was published in a top journal, compared to 37 studies using the Vancouver classification (p=0.29). During the study period, the number of yearly publications remained stagnant (p=0.899)., Conclusions: Despite valuable improvement and expansion of the latter UCS, to date, the Vancouver system clearly leads the field of classifying PFFs in the sense of the common use., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background and Aim of the Work: Post-operative periprosthetic shoulder fractures incidence is gradually raising due to aging of population and increasing of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). Management of this complication represents a challenge for the orthopedic surgeon. Aim of the present study is to critically review the recent literature about epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, management and outcome of post-operative periprosthetic humeral  fractures occurring on RTSA., Methods: A systematic search of Embase, Medline and Pubmed was performed by two reviewers who selected the eligible papers favoring studies published in the last ten years. Epidemiology, risk factors, diagnostic features, clinical management and outcome of different techniques were all reviewed., Results: 31 studies including reviews, meta-analysis, case reports, clinical and biomechanical studies were selected., Conclusions: Correct clinical management requires adequate diagnosis and evaluation of risk factors. Conservative treatment is rarely indicated. Locking plate fixation and revision arthroplasty are both valuable treatment methods. Surgical technique should be chosen considering age and functional demand, comorbidities, fracture morphology and location, bone quality and stability of the implant. Given the correct indication all surgical treatment can lead to satisfactory clinical and radiographic results despite a relevant complication rate.

Background: Hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated stem has been introduced to decrease complications and eventually achieve quicker implant ingrowth and long-term stability. The aim of this study was to determine subsidence rate and incidence of perioperative periprosthetic fracture (PPF) of uncemented collarless Corail stem for displaced femoral neck fractures according to Dorr type., Methods: A retrospective review of plain radiographs and clinical data was carried out to identify consecutive patients who underwent uncemented hip hemiarthroplasty using collarless HA-coated Corail stem between March 2010 and August 2014. The risk of subsidence and PPF according to Dorr type was evaluated., Results: Dorr types A, B, and C were found in 66 (median age 74, 29.7%), 107 (median age 77, 48.2%), and 49 (median age 80, 22.1%) cases, respectively. Subsidence of stem occurred in eight (3.6%) cases. Dorr type had significant relationship ( p < 0.05) with subsidence. Type C canals had higher rates of subsidence. PPFs occurred in 11 (5.0%) cases without showing significant difference among Dorr types not significant (n.s.). Female gender was not influential on subsidence (n.s.) and PPF (n.s.)., Conclusion: Dorr type C had higher risk of subsidence when using uncemented collarless HA-coated stem. Dorr canal type had no bearing on risk of PPFs. Women did not have significantly higher risk of both subsidence and PPFs compared to men. A collarless fully HA-coated Corail stem had 3.6% of radiological subsidence and 5.0% of PPF risk.

Purpose: Treatment for an unstable intertrochanteric fracture in elderly patients is challenging. Bipolar hemiarthroplasty (HA) using microarc oxidation (MAO) coating has been a treatment option alternative to internal fixation. However, the outcome of bipolar HA using MAO-coated stem in these patients is unknown., Methods: From July 2007 to April 2016, 234 (older than 65 years) patients (234 hips) who were diagnosed as having unstable intertrochanteric fractures were treated with bipolar HA using a fully MAO-coated standard-length rectangular cementless stem. During the arthroplasty, the greater trochanteric and the medial fracture fragments were attached to the stem and fixed with two to three 16-gauge wires. Forty-eight patients (48 hips) died within postoperative 2 years. The remaining 186 patients (186 hips) were followed up for a mean of 4.3 (range 2-10) years., Results: With the exception of 4 patients who died during hospitalization, 176 of 230 ( 76.5%) patients could ambulate independently with or without an assistive device at the time of hospital discharge. Venous thromboembolism occurred in seven patients (3.0%). One hip dislocated due to a fall 1 month after the arthroplasty. Periprosthetic femoral fracture occurred in four patients and periprosthetic acetabular fracture in one patient. One patient had periprosthetic of acute pyelonephritis. There was no focal osteolysis around the femoral stem., Conclusion: The result of cementless HA using MAO-coated stem enabled early ambulation in most (76.5%) of elderly patients with unstable intertrochanteric fractures and the results were encouraging.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the mid- to long-term outcomes of revision surgery for Vancouver type B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) after total hip arthroplasty using an uncemented extensive porous titanium-coated long femoral stem prosthesis (solution prosthesis) with or without cortical strut allograft., Methods: A total of 34 patients with Vancouver type B2 PFFs who underwent revision hip arthroplasty using a posterolateral approach and received a solution prosthesis at our institution from December 2006 to January 2014 were retrospectively recruited. Patients were asked to assess their walking ability and pain status using a questionnaire. Limb function, pain, and physical and mental health were assessed using the Harris Hip score, University of California-Los Angeles score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index, and Short Form-12 Health Survey score. Patients were also asked to rate their satisfaction with the surgery. Fracture union and stress shielding were assessed by radiography, and computed tomography was used to assess stem fixation. Single-photon emission computed tomography performed to assess radionuclide distribution in patients given cortical strut allografts. Patients were asked about their condition before PFF and evaluated at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and annually after surgery. Any complications during follow-up were recorded., Results: Of the 34 patients, 29 completed follow-up. There was no significant difference in patient's health before PFF or at the last follow-up. Fracture union was achieved in all patients. Mild-to-moderate stress shielding occurred in three patients, and no patients exhibited femoral stem loosening or obvious subsidence. Radionuclides were concentrated in the cortical strut transplantation area, and the cortical strut was integrated with the host femur. The incidence of postoperative complications was low., Conclusions: Revision surgery using the solution prosthesis with or without cortical strut allograft is effective in treating Vancouver type B2 PFFs, with satisfactory mid- and long-term clinical and radiological outcomes.

Background and purpose - In total hip replacements, stem design may affect the occurrence of periprosthetic femoral fracture. We studied risk factors for fractures around and distal to the 2 most used cemented femoral stems in Sweden. Patients and methods - This is a register study including all standard primary Lubinus SPII and Exeter Polished stems operated in Sweden between 2001 and 2009. The outcome was any kind of reoperation due to fracture around (Vancouver type B) or distal to the stem (Vancouver type C), with use of age, sex, diagnosis at primary THR, and year of index operation as covariates in a Cox regression analysis. A separate analysis of the primary osteoarthritis patient group was done in order to evaluate eventual influence of the surgical approach (lateral versus posterior) on the risk for Vancouver type B fractures. Results - The Exeter stem had a 10-times (95% CI 7-13) higher risk for type B fractures, compared with the Lubinus, while no statistically significant difference was noticed for type C fractures. The elderly, and patients with hip fracture or idiopathic femoral head necrosis, had a higher risk for both fracture types. Inflammatory arthritis was a risk factor only for type C fractures. Type B fractures were more common in men, and type C in women. A lateral approach was associated with decreased risk for Type B fracture. Interpretation - Stem design influenced the risk for type B, but not for type C fracture. The influence of surgical approach on the risk for periprosthetic femoral fracture should be studied further.

Background: The Dorr classification is widely used to evaluate femoral bone quality, but it has no clear quantitative criteria. This study aimed to evaluate the reproducibility of the Dorr classification and examine its quantitative indices on plain radiographs, which are suitable for objective classification., Hypothesis: Reproducibility of the Dorr classification is influenced by the clinical experience of the examiners, and radiographic indices are required for this classification., Materials and Methods: One hundred and one patients were examined using their preoperative plain antero-posterior and lateral radiographs. To evaluate the reproducibility of the Dorr classification, the Dorr type of each patient was judged twice each by three expert hip surgeons and three junior hip surgeons. Indices measured using the plain radiographs were canal-to-calcar ratio, cortical index (CI), and canal flare index. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to evaluate which measured parameters were suitable as indices for the Dorr classification which was determined by the consultation among three expert hip surgeons., Results: Regarding intra-examiner reproducibility, kappa coefficients for the three junior hip surgeons were 0.36, 0.62, and 0.65, whereas those for the three expert hip surgeons were 0.70, 0.86, and 0.87. Regarding inter-examiner reproducibility, the kappa coefficient for the junior hip surgeons was 0.32, whereas that for the expert hip surgeons was 0.52. The CI on the lateral radiograph had the largest area under the curve (AUC) between types A and B, whereas the CI on the anteroposterior radiograph had the largest AUC between types B and C. The respective cutoff points of the CI on the anteroposterior radiograph were 0.58 between types A and B and 0.49 between types B and C. The respective cutoff points of CI on the lateral radiograph were 0.45 between types A and B and 0.28 between types B and C., Conclusion: The intra-examiner reproducibility of the Dorr classification ranged from "fair" to "almost perfect", whereas the inter-examiner reproducibility ranged from "fair" to "moderate". Both were influenced by the level of clinical experience of the examiners. The most suitable index for classification using plain radiographs of the hip is the CI on anteroposterior and lateral radiographs., Level of Evidence: IV, retrospective study., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the radiologic outcomes of open reduction and lateral plating with wiring in the treatment of Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures., Methods: We retrospectively recruited 37 patients treated with ORIF with lateral plating and wiring for Vancouver B2 fractures. The 27 patients (15 men and 12 women; mean age: 70.8 ± 8.3 years) without follow-up loss had achieved complete bony union without notable complications. The average union period was checked after operation with radiologic findings. Radiologic outcomes were evaluated by ipsilateral limb length discrepancy (LLD) and subsidence between immediate postoperative length and length at postoperative 1 year after adjusting for magnification differences. The average distance to which the retained stem sunk down was investigated between immediate postoperative radiographs and final radiographs showing union., Results: Ten patients could not be evaluated, because of mortality or failure to follow up. The average time to union was 18.3 weeks, and the average distance of stem sinking was 2.5 ± 1.7 mm (range: 0-7.2 mm), which was significantly different between immediate postoperative radiographs and final radiographs. There was no case with loss of reduction or loss of fixation, requiring revision surgery., Conclusion: Open reduction and lateral plating with wiring as a treatment for Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures produced good radiologic outcomes with successful bony union. ORIF can be considered the alternative option for treating patients with Vancouver B2 PPF, instead of stem revision surgery., Level of Evidence: Level IV, Therapeutic study., (Copyright © 2018 Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Revision hip arthroplasty is a very challenging procedure. Use of a modular distal fixation stem is one of the available options for revision arthroplasty in patients with proximal femoral bone deficiency. The purpose of this study was to evaluate mid- to long-term outcomes of cementless modular distal fixation femoral stem implantation in revision hip surgery., Methods: Clinical and radiological findings, complications, and stem survival rate were analyzed for 46 patients (48 hips) who underwent revision hip arthroplasty using a cementless modular distal fixation femoral stem. The mean patient age was 58.8 years (range 31-82 years) and the mean follow-up period was 95 months (72-122 months). The preoperative diagnoses were aseptic loosening (36 hips), infection (4 hips), ceramic fracture (4 hips), and femoral periprosthetic fracture (4 hips)., Results: The mean Harris hip score improved from 56.6 preoperatively to 88.2 postoperatively at the last follow-up. All hips showed stable osteointegration and firm fixation. Complications involved four hips (8.3%); there was one case each of periprosthetic fracture, delayed union of osteotomy site, femoral perforation, and infection. One stem re-revision was performed for deep infection of the femoral side. The Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 97.6% at the final follow-up., Conclusion: Revision hip arthroplasty using a cementless modular distal fixation femoral stem showed satisfactory initial firm fixation and mid- to long-term survival rate. Complications can be minimized by careful surgical planning and meticulous procedure.

Introduction: Patients with Su Type III fractures based on total knee arthroplasty (TKA) constitute a patient group with problematic treatment and management. Although it has difficulties, open reduction and internal fixation is one of the treatment options., Method: A retrospective evaluation was made of 22 patients surgically treated in our clinic with double locking, low contact titanium plate and screw for a Su Type III periprosthetic fracture based on TKA. The patients were evaluated with bone mineral densitometry, postoperative Knee Society Score (KSS), WOMAC and radiological evaluations., Results: The mean follow-up period of the patients was 68.6 ± 15.5 months, with pain-free weight-bearing determined at 4.9 ± 1.1 months and mean radiological union at 18.5 ± 4.3 weeks. Revision was required because of non-union in 2 (9.09%) cases. The postoperative KSS value was 81.8 ± 7.8, the WOMAC value was 78.1 ± 5.3 and the T-score was -3.3 ± 0.3. At the final follow-up examination, a correction loss (4.9° ± 1.5°) was determined in the mean knee valgus angle according to the mechanical axis, which was statistically significant but remained within the physiological limits (p = 0.21)., Conclusion: In addition to providing the advantages of rigid fixation together with early and effective rehabilitation, satisfactory clinical and radiological results were obtained with the application of double locking plate and screw in the treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures based on TKA, with osteoporosis., Level of Evidence: Level IV, Therapeutic study., (Copyright © 2017 Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The cerclage passer instrument was introduced for aiding percutaneous reduction in spiral femur fractures, thereby overcoming the risk of devascularization of the fracture ends commonly associated with traditional open cerclage wiring techniques. This may, however, predispose to iatrogenic vascular injuries owing to the proximity of the vessels and several other factors. We report four cases with femoral artery (superficial and deep) injuries caused by the cerclage passer in proximal femur and distal femur shaft fractures and incidence of these injuries in our institution., Methods: Retrospective analysis of hospital records of femoral fractures from 2011 to 2015. All cases of femoral fractures and periprosthetic femoral fractures with cerclage wiring done using the standard or the Synthes ® cerclage passer were included. Cases with wiring done for trochanteric fractures and other locations were excluded., Results: Incidence of vascular injuries due to the cerclage passer in proximal femur shaft fractures was 1.59%, whereas in distal femur shaft fractures it was 7.14%. There were two patients with a deep femoral artery (DFA) system injury and two with a superficial femoral artery (SFA) injury caused by the cerclage passer (Synthes) in two proximal femur shaft and two distal femur shaft fractures, respectively. End-to-end anastomosis for the SFA and ligation for DFA system injuries were used, with an uneventful postoperative period in all patients., Conclusion: Caution and accuracy is imperative to avoid vascular injuries while using the cerclage passer in femur fractures, and strict vigilance is essential for early identification and prompt management.

One third of the people aged 65 years and over fall every year, and 1-5% of these falls result in a fracture. For these people, history of fracture and surgery become a risk factor for recurrent falls. In osteoporotic patients, repeated fractures often require several osteosynthetic procedures within a short time frame. Despite the lack of biomechanical studies, clinical experience suggests that additional fractures adjacent to implants occur because of the difference in stiffness between the metallic implant and the osteoporotic bone. This requires customized fixation techniques to ensure stability. The technique was first performed in an 81-year old female patient presenting with a dislocated proximal femoral fracture at the tip of a previously implanted distal femoral nail (DFN), and non-union of the old fracture. For this technique, the DFN was advanced until it passed the proximal fracture, thereby reducing both fractures, while a lateral femoral nail (LFN), extra-long and 3 mm thicker than the DFN, was introduced and advanced distally. The LFN was implanted in a "kissing nail technique," meaning the tips of the two nails were touching each other, and all fracture fragments were held in functional reduction. The DFN was slowly pulled backwards and fragment stability was maintained, while both nails passed the distal non-union. The Kissing Nail Technique allows simple, safe and fast reduction of all instable fragments, precise and easy positioning of the proximal entry point by the retrograde guide wire, a minimally invasive procedure, and stable fixation of a periprosthetic fracture. We found this new customized procedure accommodating to the unique anatomical features of a single patient, that can be applied as a strategy especially for osteoporotic patients with periprosthetic fractures., (Copyright © 2017. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.)

The rate of periprosthetic femoral fractures following total hip replacement has been growing steadily in the last 20 years and ranges from 0.1% to 2.1%. These fractures are mostly related to older patients with the presence of chronic diseases and frequently poor bone quality. The treatment is surgically very complex and demanding, followed by a series of complications. The evaluation in this retrospective study included 23 patients who were medically treated from January 2004 to December 2015 with the mean follow-up of 14.5 (range, 9-25) months. There were 17 patients with cement total hip arthroplasty (THA) and 6 with cementless THA. During treatment of fractures, different techniques were implemented including the use of wire cerclage, dynamic compression plates (DCP), a locking compression plate (LCP) system, and long revision stem. For the purpose of distinguishing fractures, we used the Vancouver classification by Duncan and Masri. For clinical evaluation, we used the modified Merle d'Aubigne score system and monitored complications during treatment. The aim is to show treatment results of the type B periprosthetic femoral fractures by using different operative treatment techniques. According to the Vancouver classification within type B, 10 (43.47%) patients had type B1 fractures, another 10 (43.47%) patients had type B2 fractures, and three (13.04%) patients had type B3 fractures. According to gender distribution, there were eight (34.8%) male and 15 (65.2%) female patients, mean age 59.5 (range, 47-86) years. Twelve (52.2%) and 11 (47.8%) patients had left- and right-sided fractures, respectively. The mean length of hospital stay was 16 (range, 9-26) days. According to the Merle d'Aubigne score system, 10 patients with type B1 fractures had the mean score of 11.5 points, which is poor result. Poor result was also recorded in patients with type B2 fractures, with the mean score of 10.6 points. The three patients with type B3 fractures had the mean score of 12 points, which is considered fair score. In conclusion, Vancouver classification has been widely accepted and using the protocols makes decision making during treatment much easier. During treatment of this type of fracture, we used various implants, wire cerclage, DCP and LCP, as well as long stem revision. In certain cases, we applied surgical techniques, implants that are not recommended by the Vancouver protocol by which we treated periprosthetic femoral fractures; in these case, we recorded nonunion bone, malunion and breaking of implants, which resulted in poor treatment outcome.

Background and Aim of the Work: Periprosthetic knee fractures incidence is gradually raising due to aging of population and increasing of total knee arthroplasties. Management of this complication represents a challenge for the orthopaedic surgeon. Aim of the present study is to critically review the recent literature about epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, management and outcome of periprosthetic knee fractures., Methods: A systematic search of Embase, Medline and Pubmed was performed by two reviewers who selected the eligible papers favoring studies published in the last ten years. Epidemiology, risk factors, diagnostic features, clinical management and outcome of different techniques were all reviewed., Results: 52 studies including reviews, meta-analysis, clinical and biomechanical studies were selected., Conclusions: Correct clinical management requires adequate diagnosis and evaluation of risk factors. Conservative treatment is rarely indicated. Locking plate fixation, intramedullary nailing and revision arthroplasty are all valuable treatment methods. Surgical technique should be chosen considering age and functional demand, comorbidities, fracture morphology and location, bone quality and stability of the implant. Given the correct indication all surgical treatment can lead to satisfactory clinical and radiographic results despite a relevant complication rate.

Background and purpose - Short-term experimental studies have confirmed that there is superior fixation of cementless implants inserted with compaction compared to broaching of the cancellous bone. Patients and methods - 1-stage, bilateral primary THA was performed in 28 patients between May 2001 and September 2007. The patients were randomized to femoral bone preparation with broaching on 1 side and compaction on the other side. 8 patients declined to attend the postoperative follow-up, leaving 20 patients (13 male) with a mean age of 58 (36-70) years for evaluation. The patients were followed with radiostereometric analysis (RSA) at baseline, at 6 and 12 weeks, and at 1, 2, and 5 years, and measurements of periprosthetic bone mineral density (BMD) at baseline and at 1, 2, and 5 years. The subjective part of the Harris hip score (HHS) and details of complications throughout the observation period were obtained at a mean interval of 6.3 (3.0-9.5) years after surgery. Results - Femoral stems in the compaction group had a higher degree of medio-lateral migration (0.21 mm, 95% CI: 0.03-0.40) than femoral stems in the broaching group at 5 years (p = 0.02). No other significant differences in translations or rotations were found between the 2 surgical techniques at 2 years (p > 0.4) and 5 years (p > 0.7) postoperatively. There were no individual stems with continuous migration. Periprosthetic BMD in the 7 Gruen zones was similar at 2 years and at 5 years. Intraoperative femoral fractures occurred in 2 of 20 compacted hips, but there were none in the 20 broached hips. The HHS and dislocations were similar in the 2 groups at 6.3 (3.0-9.5) years after surgery. Interpretation - Bone compaction as a surgical technique with the Bi-Metric stem did not show the superior outcomes expected compared to conventional broaching. Furthermore, 2 periprosthetic fractures occurred using the compaction technique, so we cannot recommend compaction for insertion of the cementless Bi-Metric stem.

Periprosthetic femoral fracture (PFF) is a complicated complication of both primary and revision hip arthroplasty with an increasing incidence. The present study aimed to summarize the clinical characteristics and identify the risk factors for PFF which would be potentially helpful in the prevention and treatment of PFF.We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 89 cases of PFF, and a case-control study was designed to identify the potential risk for intraoperative and postoperative PFF in both primary and revision hip arthroplasty.The overall incidence of PFF was 2.08% (intraoperative: 1.77%, postoperative: 0.30%, revision: 13.60%, and primary: 0.97%). The most commonly used treatment strategy was fixation with cerclage wire or band for intraoperative PFF, whereas long stem revision with plate or cortical allograft strut fixation was the main treatment strategy for postoperative PFF. The risk factors for intraoperative PFF in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) included the diagnosis of development dysplasia of the hip (DDH) (odds ratio [OR] = 5.01, 95%CI, 1.218-20.563, P=0.03) and CBR ≥ 0.49 (OR = 3.34, 95%CI, 1.138-9.784, P = 0.03). The increased age was associated with increased incidence of postoperative PFF in primary THA (OR = 1.09, 95%CI, 1.001-1.194, P = 0.04). As for the intraoperative PFF in revision THA, we found that receiving multiple operations before revision (OR = 2.45, 95%CI, 1.06-5.66, P = 0.04), revisions due to prosthetic joint infection (OR = 6.72, 95%CI, 1.007-44.832, P = 0.04), the presence of cementless implant before revision (OR = 13.54, 95%CI, 3.103-59.08, P = 0.001), and femoral deformity (OR = 8.03, 95%CI, 1.656-38.966, P = 0.01) were all risk factors.Screening for high-risk patients, preoperative templating, and detailed discharge instructions may be the potential strategies to reduce the incidence of PFF. The treatment of PFFs should take into account Vancouver classification system, patient's characteristics as well as the experience of the operating surgeon., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Introduction: Surgical management of massive bone defects is very challenging in terms of estimating possibilities of saving the extremity and adequate method that can make it possible. Selection of methods is additionally limited in the presence of infection at site of defect., Case Report: The female patient, diagnosed with Ewing sarcoma was treated by segmental bone resection and implantation of Kotz modular tumor endoprosthesis. After 5 years the signs of infection occured and persisted with low grade intensity. After falling, 12 years following implantation, the patient acquired periprosthetic fracture. Then endoprosthesis was removed, all along with surgical debridement of wound and application of the Ilizarov apparatus. The apparatus was applied, osteotomy of callus and the tibia performed with transport of bone segments, untill reconstruction of defect and arthrodesis of the knee was achieved., Conclusion: The Ilizarov apparatus offered us huge possibilities for management of massive bone defects with natural bone which has superior biomechanical characteristics comparing to the implant. The most frequent complication of this method is a prolonged treatment period that demands good patient selection and preparation and wide surgical experience.

Background: Modular revision femoral components allow the surgeon to make more precise intraoperative adjustments in anteversion and sizing, which may afford lower dislocation rates and improved osseointegration, but may not offer distinct advantages when compared with less expensive monoblock revision stems., Questions/purposes: We compared modular and monoblock femoral components for revision of Paprosky Type I to IIIA femoral defects to determine (1) survivorship of the stems; and (2) complications denoted as intraoperative fracture, dislocation, or failure of osseointegration., Methods: Between 2004 and 2010, participating surgeons at three centers revised 416 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) with Paprosky Type I to IIIA femoral defects. Of those with minimum 2-year followup (343 THAs, mean followup 51 ± 13 months), 150 (44%) were treated with modular stems and 193 (56%) were treated with monoblock, cylindrical, fully porous-coated stems. During this time, modular stems were generally chosen when there was remodeling of the proximal femur into retroversion and/or larger canal diameters (usually > 18 mm). A total of 27 patients died (6%) with stems intact before 2 years, 46 THAs (13%) were lost to followup before 2 years for reasons other than death, and there was no differential loss to followup between the study groups. The modular stems included 101 with a cylindrical distal geometry (67%) and 49 with a tapered geometry (33%). Mean age (64 versus 68 years), percentage of women (53% versus 47%), and body mass index (31 versus 30 kg/m(2)) were not different between the two cohorts, whereas there was trend toward a slightly greater case complexity in the modular group (55% versus 65% Type 3a femoral defects, p = 0.06). Kaplan-Meier survivorship was calculated for the endpoint of aseptic revision. Proportions of complications in each cohort (dislocation, intraoperative fracture, and failure of osseointegration) were compared., Results: Femoral component rerevision for any reason (including infection) was greater (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.63-2.57; p = 0.03) in the monoblock group (27 of 193 [14%]) compared with the modular cohort (10 of 150 [7%]). Femoral component survival free from aseptic rerevision was greater in the modular group with 91% survival (95% CI, 89%-95%) at 9 years compared with 86% survival (95% CI, 83%-88%) for the monoblock group in the same timeframe. There was no difference in the proportion of mechanically relevant aseptic complications (30 of 193 [16%] in the monoblock group versus 34 of 150 [23%] in the modular group, p = 0.10; OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.86-2.53). There were more intraoperative fractures in the modular group (17 of 150 [11%] versus nine of 193 [5%]; OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.68-2.73; p = 0.02). There were no differences in the proportions of dislocation (13 of 193 [7%] monoblock versus 14 of 150 [9%] modular; OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.67-1.16; p = 0.48) or failure of osseointegration (eight of 193 [4%] monoblock versus three of 150 [2%] modular; OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 0.88-2.84; p = 0.19) between the two groups with the number of hips available for study., Conclusions: Although rerevisions were less common in patients treated with modular stems, aseptic complications such as intraoperative fractures were more common in that group, and the sample was too small to evaluate corrosion-related or fatigue concerns associated with modularity. We cannot therefore conclude from this that one design is superior to the other. Larger studies and pooled analyses will need to be performed to answer this question, but we believe modularity should be avoided in more straightforward cases if possible., Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study.

Background: The bimodular femoral neck implant (modularity in the neck section and prosthetic head) offers several implant advantages to the surgeon performing THAs, however, there have been reports of failure of bimodular femoral implants involving neck fractures or adverse tissue reaction to metal debris. We aimed to assess the results of the bimodular implants used in the THAs we performed., Questions/purposes: We asked: (1) What is the survivorship of the PROFEMUR(®) bimodular femoral neck stems? (2) What are the modes of failure of this bimodular femoral neck implant? (3) What are the major risk factors for the major modes of failure of this device?, Methods: Between 2003 and 2009, we used one family of bimodular femoral neck stems for all primary THAs (PROFEMUR(®) Z and PROFEMUR(®) E). During this period, 277 THAs (in 242 patients) were performed with these implants. One hundred seventy were done with the bimodular PROFEMUR(®) E (all are accounted for here), and when that implant was suspected of having a high risk of failure, the bimodular PROFEMUR(®) Z was used instead. One hundred seven THAs were performed using this implant (all are accounted for in this study). All bearing combinations, including metal-on-metal, metal-on-polyethylene, and ceramic-on-ceramic, are included here. Data for the cohort included patient demographics, BMI, implant dimensions, type of articular surface, length of followup, and C-reactive protein serum level. We assessed survivorship of the two stems using Kaplan-Meier curves and determined the frequency of the different modes of stem failure. For each of the major modes of failure, we performed binary logistic regression to identify associated risk factors., Results: Survivorship of the stems, using aseptic revision as the endpoint, was 85% for the patients with the PROFEMUR(®) E stems with a mean followup of 50 months (range, 1-125 months) and 85% for the PROFEMUR(®) Z with a mean followup of 50 months (range, 1-125 months)(95% CI, 74-87 months). The most common modes of failure were loosening (9% for the PROFEMUR(®) E), neck fracture (6% for the PROFEMUR(®) Z and 0.6% for the PROFEMUR(®) E), metallosis (1%), and periprosthetic fracture (1%). Only the bimodular PROFEMUR(®) E was associated with femoral stem loosening (odds ratio [OR] =1.1; 95% CI, 1.04-1.140; p = 0.032). Larger head (OR = 3.2; 95% CI, 0.7-14; p = 0.096), BMI (OR = 1.19; 95% CI, 1-1.4; p = 0.038) and total offset (OR = 1.83; 95% CI, 1.13-2.9; p = 0.039) were associated with neck fracture., Conclusion: Bimodular neck junctions may be potentiated by long neck lengths, greater offset, and larger head diameters. These factors may contribute to bimodular neck failure by creating a larger moment about the neck's insertion in the stem. The PROFEMUR(®) E implant is associated with high periprosthetic loosening. Based on our experience we cannot recommend the use of bimodular femoral neck implants., Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study.

Background: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is often performed in patients who are older and may take bisphosphonates to treat a variety of conditions, most commonly osteoporosis. However, the clinical effects of bisphosphonate use on patients who have undergone THA are not well described., Questions/purposes: (1) Is bisphosphonate use in patients with osteoarthritis undergoing primary THA associated with a change in the risk of all-cause revision, aseptic revision, or periprosthetic fracture compared with patients not treated with bisphosphonates? (2) Does the risk of bisphosphonate use and revision and periprosthetic fracture vary by patient bone mineral density and age?, Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 12,878 THA recipients for the diagnosis of osteoarthritis was conducted; 17.8% of patients were bisphosphonate users. Data sources for this study included a joint replacement registry (93% voluntary participation) and electronic health records and an osteoporosis screening database with complete capture of cases as part of the Kaiser Permanente integrated healthcare system. The endpoints for this study were revision surgery for any cause, aseptic revision, and periprosthetic fracture. The exposure of interest was bisphosphonate use; patients were considered users if prescriptions were continuously refilled for a period equal to or longer than 6 months. Bone quality (based on dual-energy x-ray absorptiometery ordered based on the National Osteoporosis Foundation's clinical guidelines taken within 5 years of the THA) and patient age (< 65 versus ≥ 65 years) were evaluated as effect modifiers. Patient, surgeon, and hospital factors were evaluated as confounders. Cox proportional hazards models were used. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined., Results: Age- and sex-adjusted risks of all-cause (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.33-0.74; p < 0.001) and aseptic revision (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.34-0.81; p = 0.004) was lower in bisphosphonate users than in nonusers. The adjusted risk of periprosthetic fractures in patients on bisphosphonates was higher than in patients not on bisphosphonates (HR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.13-3.27; p = 0.016). Lower risks of all-cause revision and aseptic revision were observed in patients with osteopenia (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.29-0.84; and HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.99, respectively) and osteoporosis (HR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.08-0.62; and HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.11-0.99, respectively)., Conclusions: Patients considered bisphosphonate users who underwent THA had a lower risk for revision surgery. Bisphosphonate use was associated with a higher risk of periprosthetic fractures in younger patients with normal bone quantity. Evaluation of bone quality and bisphosphonate use for the diagnosis of osteoporosis is encouraged in patients with osteoarthritis who are candidates for primary THA. Further research is required to determine the optimal duration of therapy because long-term bisphosphonate use has been associated with atypical femur fractures., Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study.

Background: Postoperative periprosthetic femur fractures are an increasing concern after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Identifying and understanding predisposing factors are important to mitigating future risk. Femoral stem design may be one such factor., Questions/purposes: The goals of our study were to compare the (1) frequency of periprosthetic femur fracture and implant survivorship; (2) time to fracture in those patients who experienced periprosthetic femur fracture; and (3) predictive risk factors for periprosthetic femur fracture between a unique stem design with an exaggerated proximal taper angle and other contemporary cementless, proximally fixed, tapered stems., Methods: We reviewed all hips in which a femoral hip component with a uniquely exaggerated proximal taper angle (ProxiLock) was implanted during primary THA at a single academic institution. That group of patients was compared with a cohort of patients who underwent primary THA during the same time interval (1995-2008) in which any other cementless, proximally fixed, tapered stem design was used. The two groups differed somewhat in terms of sex, age, and body mass index, although these differences were of unclear clinical significance. During the study, 3964 primary THAs were performed using six different designs of cementless, proximally fixed, tapered femoral hip prostheses. There were 736 stems in the ProxiLock (PL) patient group and 3228 stems in the non-ProxiLock (non-PL) group. In general, the stem highlighted in this study became the routine cementless stem used for primary THA for three arthroplasty surgeons without specific patient or radiographic indications. Periprosthetic fractures were identified within each group. The incidence, timing, type, and treatment required for each fracture were analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to determine study patient survival free of any postoperative fracture. Radiographs and the electronic medical record of each patient who sustained a fracture were reviewed. Followup was comparable between groups at all time points., Results: The Kaplan-Meier estimate for fracture-free patient survival was worse in the PL group at all time points with survival of 98.4% (range, 97.4%-99.3%), 97.1% (range, 95.9%-98.3%), 95.4% (range, 93.8%-97.0%), and 92.6% (range, 89.6%-95.3%) at 30 days, 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years, respectively, for the PL patient group compared with 99.8% (range, 99.7%-99.9%), 99.6% (range, 99.3%-99.8%), 99.3% (range, 99.0%-99.6%), and 98.4% (range, 97.5%-99.1%) in the non-PL patient group (p < 0.001). Patients in the PL group had increased cumulative probability of both early and late fractures with cumulative probabilities of fracture of 2.5% (range, 1.3%-3.6%) at 90 days and 7.4% (range, 4.7%-10.4%) at 10 years compared with probabilities of 0.3% (range, 0.1%-0.5%) at 90 days and 1.6% (range, 0.8%-2.5%) at 10 years in the non-PL group (p < 0.001). Patients in the PL group had an increased risk of postoperative periprosthetic femur fracture (hazard ratio [HR], 5.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.4-9.1; p < 0.001); fracture requiring reoperation (HR, 8.4; 95% CI, 4.4-15.9); p < 0.001); and fracture requiring stem revision (HR, 9.1; 95% CI, 4.5-18.5; p < 0.001). Age older than 60 years was also a risk factor for fracture (HR, 3.7; 95% CI, 2.1-6.4), but sex, body mass index, and preoperative diagnosis were not predictive., Conclusions: Hips implanted with an uncemented femoral stem, which has a uniquely exaggerated proximal taper angle, had an increased risk of both early and late postoperative periprosthetic femur fracture. The majority of patients with a fracture underwent reoperation or stem revision. The unique proximal geometry, lack of axial support from the smooth cylindrical distal stem as well as resorption of the hydroxyapatite coating and poor ongrowth with subsequent subsidence may contribute to increased risk of fracture. Although this particular stem has recently been discontinued by the manufacturer, these findings are important in regard to followup care for patients with this stem implanted as well as for future cementless stem design in general., Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study.

Background: The increasing implantation rates of total hip and knee prostheses have been accompanied by a corresponding rise in periprosthetic fractures (PPF), most often affecting the femur., Method: This review is based on a selective search of the PubMed database for articles in English and German. The search was carried out with a set of pertinent medical subject headings (MeSH) and as a free text search employing a logical combination of search terms (evidence grade III-IV)., Results: Soft-tissue-sparing, stable-angle plate osteosynthesis with a firmly seated implant is a safe treatment of periprosthetic femoral fracture (PPFF). A correct assessment of the stability of the prosthesis is a prerequisite for the success of treatment. A loose prosthesis must be surgically revised, and a failed osteosynthesis can also necessitate revision of the prosthesis. The conservative management of PPFF is generally not indicated, as it has a high complication rate., Conclusion: The treatment of periprosthetic fractures requires competence, not just in osteosynthetic techniques, but also in endoprosthesis implantation and revision. Careful preoperative planning to select the proper treatment is essential, and the necessary equipment must be on hand.

Periprosthetic femoral fractures following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) represent an emerging challenge for the orthopaedic surgeon, because of their increasing incidence and negative impact on clinical and functional patient outcome. For these reasons, in the last decade, many efforts were made to prevent and manage  this complication  and a large number of studies were focused on finding out the best treatment. The type of treatment depends on several factors such as morphology and location of the fracture, implant stability, quality and quantity of bone stock, patient's age and clinical conditions. Fractures that cause loosening of the stem always require its revision, with a contextual assessment of the quality and quantity of remaining bone stock, which is generally good in type B2 and poor in type B3 according to Vancouver's classification. The latter may require the use of bone grafts. In this context, the  authors performed the following study and analyzed the results of 45 patients treated surgically for periprosthetic femoral fractures with revision of the femoral stem during a fourteen years period, between June 1999 and June 2013.

Background: The growing utilization of total joint replacement will increase the frequency of its complications, including periprosthetic fracture. The prevalence and risk factors of periprosthetic fracture require further study, particularly over the course of long-term follow-up. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence and risk factors for periprosthetic fractures occurring in recipients of total hip replacement., Methods: We identified Medicare beneficiaries who had elective primary total hip replacement (THR) for non-fracture diagnoses between July 1995 and June 1996. We followed them using Medicare Part A claims data through 2008. We used ICD-9 codes to identify periprosthetic femoral fractures occurring from 2006-2008. We used the incidence density method to calculate the annual incidence of these fractures and Cox proportional hazards models to identify risk factors for periprosthetic fracture. We also calculated the risk of hospitalization over the subsequent year., Results: Of 58,521 Medicare beneficiaries who had elective primary THR between July 1995 and June 1996, 32,463 (55%) survived until January 2006. Of these, 215 (0.7%) developed a periprosthetic femoral fracture between 2006 and 2008. The annual incidence of periprosthetic fracture among these individuals was 26 per 10,000 person-years. In the Cox model, a greater risk of periprosthetic fracture was associated with having had a total knee replacement (HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.30, 2.55) or a revision total hip replacement (HR1.40, 95% CI 0.95, 2.07) between the primary THR and 2006. Compared to those without fractures, THR recipients who sustained periprosthetic femoral fracture had three-fold higher risk of hospitalization in the subsequent year (89% vs. 27%, p<0.0001)., Conclusion: A decade after primary THR, periprosthetic fractures occur annually in 26 per 10,000 persons and are especially frequent in those with prior total knee or revision total hip replacements.

Total hip replacements (THR) with modular femoral components (stem-neck interface) make it possible to adapt to extramedullary femoral parameters (anteversion, offset, and length) theoretically improving muscle function and stability. Nevertheless, adding a new interface has its disadvantages: reduced mechanical resistance, fretting corrosion and material fatigue fracture. We report the case of a femoral stem fracture of the female part of the component where the modular morse taper of the neck is inserted. An extended trochanteric osteotomy was necessary during revision surgery because the femoral stump could not be grasped for extraction, so that a long stem had to be used. In this case, the patient had the usual risk factors for modular neck failure: he was an active overweight male patient with a long varus neck. This report shows that the female part of the stem of a small femoral component may also be at increased failure risk and should be added to the list of risk factors. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of this type of failure., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)