Comparative outcomes of uncemented and cemented stem revision in managing periprosthetic femoral fractures: a retrospective cohort study.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology Pub Date : 2024-07-18 DOI:10.1186/s10195-024-00777-z
Michael Axenhus, Sebastian Mukka, Martin Magnéli, Olof Sköldenberg
{"title":"Comparative outcomes of uncemented and cemented stem revision in managing periprosthetic femoral fractures: a retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Michael Axenhus, Sebastian Mukka, Martin Magnéli, Olof Sköldenberg","doi":"10.1186/s10195-024-00777-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) following hip arthroplasty, especially Vancouver B2 and B3 fractures, present a challenge due to the association with a loose femoral stem, necessitating either open reduction and internal fixation or stem revision. This study aims to compare outcomes between uncemented and cemented stem revisions in managing Vancouver B2 and B3 fractures, considering factors such as hip-related complications, reoperations, and clinical outcome.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Danderyd Hospital, Sweden, from 2008 to 2022, encompassing operatively treated Vancouver B2 and B3 fractures. Patients were categorized into uncemented and cemented stem revision groups, with data collected on complications, revision surgeries, fracture healing times, and clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 241 patients were identified. Significant differences were observed between the two groups in patient demographics, with the cemented group comprising older patients and more females. Follow up ranged from 1 to 15 years. Average follow up time was 3.9 years for the cemented group and 5.5 years for the uncemented group. The cemented stems demonstrated lower rates of dislocation (8.9% versus 22.5%, P = 0.004) and stem loosening (0.6% versus 9.3%, P = 0.004) than the uncemented method. Moreover, the cemented group exhibited shorter fracture healing times (11.4 weeks versus 16.7 weeks, P = 0.034). There was no difference in clinical outcome between groups. Mortality was higher in the cemented group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This retrospective study indicates that cemented stem revision for Vancouver B2-3 fractures is correlated with lower dislocation and stem loosening rates, necessitating fewer reoperations and shorter fracture healing times compared with the uncemented approach. The cemented group had a notably higher mortality rate, urging caution in its clinical interpretation.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence iii: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":48603,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11258106/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s10195-024-00777-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) following hip arthroplasty, especially Vancouver B2 and B3 fractures, present a challenge due to the association with a loose femoral stem, necessitating either open reduction and internal fixation or stem revision. This study aims to compare outcomes between uncemented and cemented stem revisions in managing Vancouver B2 and B3 fractures, considering factors such as hip-related complications, reoperations, and clinical outcome.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Danderyd Hospital, Sweden, from 2008 to 2022, encompassing operatively treated Vancouver B2 and B3 fractures. Patients were categorized into uncemented and cemented stem revision groups, with data collected on complications, revision surgeries, fracture healing times, and clinical outcomes.

Results: A total of 241 patients were identified. Significant differences were observed between the two groups in patient demographics, with the cemented group comprising older patients and more females. Follow up ranged from 1 to 15 years. Average follow up time was 3.9 years for the cemented group and 5.5 years for the uncemented group. The cemented stems demonstrated lower rates of dislocation (8.9% versus 22.5%, P = 0.004) and stem loosening (0.6% versus 9.3%, P = 0.004) than the uncemented method. Moreover, the cemented group exhibited shorter fracture healing times (11.4 weeks versus 16.7 weeks, P = 0.034). There was no difference in clinical outcome between groups. Mortality was higher in the cemented group.

Conclusions: This retrospective study indicates that cemented stem revision for Vancouver B2-3 fractures is correlated with lower dislocation and stem loosening rates, necessitating fewer reoperations and shorter fracture healing times compared with the uncemented approach. The cemented group had a notably higher mortality rate, urging caution in its clinical interpretation.

Level of evidence iii:

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
治疗股骨假体周围骨折的非骨水泥和骨水泥柄翻修效果比较:一项回顾性队列研究。
简介:髋关节置换术后的股骨假体周围骨折(PFFs),尤其是温哥华B2和B3骨折,由于与松动的股骨干有关,需要进行切开复位和内固定术或骨干翻修,因此是一项挑战。本研究旨在考虑髋关节相关并发症、再手术和临床效果等因素,比较非骨水泥和骨水泥股骨干翻修术治疗温哥华B2和B3骨折的效果:瑞典Danderyd医院于2008年至2022年期间开展了一项回顾性队列研究,研究对象包括接受过手术治疗的温哥华B2和B3骨折患者。患者被分为非骨水泥和骨水泥柄翻修组,并收集了有关并发症、翻修手术、骨折愈合时间和临床效果的数据:结果:共确定了241名患者。两组患者在人口统计学方面存在显著差异,骨水泥组患者年龄较大,女性较多。随访时间从 1 年到 15 年不等。骨水泥植入组的平均随访时间为 3.9 年,非骨水泥植入组为 5.5 年。骨水泥基台脱位率(8.9%对22.5%,P = 0.004)和基台松动率(0.6%对9.3%,P = 0.004)均低于非骨水泥基台。此外,骨水泥组的骨折愈合时间更短(11.4周对16.7周,P = 0.034)。两组的临床结果没有差异。结论:这项回顾性研究表明,与非骨水泥方法相比,骨水泥干翻修治疗温哥华B2-3骨折的脱位率和干松动率较低,需要再次手术的次数较少,骨折愈合时间较短。骨水泥组的死亡率明显较高,因此在临床解释时需要谨慎:
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
56
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, the official open access peer-reviewed journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, publishes original papers reporting basic or clinical research in the field of orthopaedic and traumatologic surgery, as well as systematic reviews, brief communications, case reports and letters to the Editor. Narrative instructional reviews and commentaries to original articles may be commissioned by Editors from eminent colleagues. The Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology aims to be an international forum for the communication and exchange of ideas concerning the various aspects of orthopaedics and musculoskeletal trauma.
期刊最新文献
Is there a difference in pelvic and femoral morphology in early periprosthetic femoral fracture in cementless short stem total hip arthroplasty via an anterolateral approach? Differences in the effectiveness of leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma compared with leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of rotator cuff surgery: an umbrella review of meta-analyses. Can a single question replace patient-reported outcomes in the follow-up of elbow arthroplasty? A validation study. Are the costs of 3D printing for surgical procedures yet to be definitively assessed? The extensive use of 3D printing in trauma does not yet fit the value-based healthcare era.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1