Nottingham Hip Fracture Score: Does It Predict Mortality in Distal Femoral Fracture Patients?

Background Patients with distal femur fractures are associated with mortality rates comparable to neck of femur fractures. Identifying high-risk patients is crucial in terms of orthogeriatric input, pre-operative medical optimisation and risk stratification for anaesthetics. The Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) is a validated predictor of 30-day mortality in neck of femur fracture patients. In this study, we aim to investigate and evaluate the suitability of the NHFS in predicting 30-day as well as one-year mortality of patients who have sustained distal femur fractures. Methods Patients admitted to a level 1 major trauma centre with distal femur fractures were retrospectively reviewed between June 2012 and October 2017. NHFSs were recorded using parameters immediately pre-operatively. Results Ninety-one patients were included for analysis with a mean follow-up of 32 months. The mean age was 69, 56 (61%) patients were female, 10 (11%) were open fractures and 32 (35%) were peri-prosthetic fractures with 85% of patients being surgically managed. Forty-one patients were found to have an NHFS >4. Overall mortality at 30 days was 7.7% and at 1 year was 21%. Patients with an NHFS of ≤4 had a lower mortality rate at 30 days of 6% compared with those with >4 at 9.8% (p=0.422). On Kaplan-Meier plotting and log-rank test, patients with an NHFS of >4 were associated with a higher mortality rate at 1 year at 36.6% compared to patients with an NHFS of ≤4 at 8% (p=0.001). Conclusion NHFS is a promising tool not only in neck of femur fractures but also distal femur fractures in risk-stratifying patients for pre-operative optimisation as well as a predictor of mortality.

Hip Hemiarthroplasty: The Misnomer of a Narrow Femoral Canal and the Cost Implications.

Objective Hemiarthroplasty has been identified as the treatment of choice for displaced intracapsular femoral neck fractures. A modular prosthesis is sometimes preferred for its sizing options in narrow femoral canals, despite its higher cost and no advantage in clinical outcomes. Thus, in this study, we investigated the factors affecting surgeons' choice of prosthesis, hypothesizing that modular hemiarthroplasty is overused for narrow femoral canals compared to monoblock hip hemiarthroplasty. Methods A retrospective study of a regional level 1 trauma center was conducted. Patients who had sustained femoral neck fractures from March 2013 to December 2016 were included in this study. Inclusion criterion was modular hemiarthroplasty for a narrow femoral canal. A matched group of patients who underwent monobloc hemiarthroplasty (MH) was created through randomization. The main outcome measurements were sex, age, Dorr classification, and femoral head size. We measured the protrusion of the greater trochanter beyond the level of the lateral femoral cortex postoperatively. Modular hemiarthroplasty patients were templated on radiographs using TraumaCad for Stryker Exeter Trauma Stem (ETS®). Results In total, 533 hemiarthroplasty procedures were performed, of which 27 were modular for a narrow femoral canal. The ratio of modular to monobloc was 1:18. Average head size was 46.7 mm ± 3.6 mm for monobloc and 44.07 ± 1.5 for modular (P= 0.001). There were four malaligned stems in the monobloc group versus 14 in the modular group (P= 0.008). Unsatisfactory lateralization was noted in 18 patients (7 mm ± 2.9 mm) in the modular group compared with 8 (4.7 mm ± 3.9 mm) in the monobloc group (P= 0.029). Dorr classification was A or B in 24 patients in the modular group and 18 in the monobloc group (P = 0.006). Templating revealed that modular was not required in 25 patients. Conclusions As per our findings, it was determined that patients with a narrow femoral canal intraoperatively should not receive modular hemiarthroplasty. This is especially true for female patients with small femoral head and narrow femoral canal dimensions (Dorr A and B). They would require extensive careful planning. Surgical techniques should be explored through education intraoperatively to achieve lateralization during femoral stem preparation. This may avoid prolonged anesthetic time and achieve potential cost savings.

The Importance of Flare: A Radiological Evaluation of Fixed-Angle Guide and Barrel-Plate in Sliding Hip Screws.

Background and objective The sliding hip screw (SHS) remains the main operative implant of choice for A1/2 intertrochanteric fractures. These implants are often fixed-angled with a corresponding guide to decrease inventory and implant cost. However, there are varying sizes of base plates on the fixed-angle device between industries. Screw placement is crucial to achieving optimal tip-apex distance (TAD) and position. Due to the flare of the greater trochanter (GT), we hypothesise that the fixed-angle guide can lead to malpositioning. In this study, we aimed to describe the discrepancy between the fixed-angle guide (short: 38 mm, long: 60 mm), the flare of the GT, and the effects on screw placement. Methods Patients who received SHS between August to December 2019 were evaluated. We measured the neck-shaft angle, GT flare angle to the femoral axis, screw-plate angle, screw position, and TAD. We templated the optimal 135° fixed-angle barrel-plate, angle guides, and measured the divergence between the angles. Results A total of 30 patients were identified to be included in the study; 24/30 (80%) were female, with 16/30 (53%) receiving SHS on the right hip. The average age of the participants was 82 ±9 years. The average neck-shaft angle was 132.4° ±5.9. The GT flare angle was 3.2° ±1.6. Of note, 66% of patients had a screw-plate angle of ≥135° with an average of 137° ±3.7. However, only 10/30 (33%) screws were placed superiorly, with an average TAD of 21 mm ±11 compared to screws placed in the centre and inferiorly at 9.5 mm ±3 (p=0.0004). The long fixed-angle guide resulted in a lower divergence angle at 3° ±1.7 compared to 5.2° ±2.6 for the short fixed-angle guide (p=0.0001). Conclusion Using the fixed-angle guide at 135° on the GT flare results in a sub-optimum screw-plate angle. This can lead to malpositioning of the screw, as well as increased TAD and screw-plate angle. Preoperative planning is crucial to measure the femoral neck-shaft angle, GT flare, as well as utilising a longer fixed-angle guide.