Non-traumatic Atypical Peri-implant Femoral Fracture at the Distal Screw after Short Femoral Nail Fixation for a Pertrochanteric Fracture.

This is the second report of an atypical peri-implant femoral fracture occurring at the distal screw after intramedullary nail fixation of a pertrochanteric fracture. A 94-year-old Japanese female with a 5-year history of alendronate intake presented with prodromal pain in her right thigh after intramedullary nail fixation. Plain radiographs showed an incomplete noncomminuted transverse fracture at the distal screw, suggesting an atypical peri-implant femoral fracture. The pathogenesis of an atypical peri-implant femoral fracture could be a combined systemic bone metabolism disorder and repetitive overloading at the screw, similar to the pathogenesis of an atypical periprosthetic femoral fracture around stem implantation.

Atypical Periprosthetic Femoral Fracture Might be Considered a Distinct Subtype of Atypical Femoral Fracture: A Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: The exact relationship among atypical periprosthetic femoral fractures (APFFs), typical periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs), and atypical femur fractures (AFFs) remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of APFFs among PFFs and to identify the clinical characteristics, management, and prognosis that distinguish APFFs from typical PFFs and AFFs to further determine the relationship among these three fracture types. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we reviewed the clinical data of 117 consecutive patients who had PFFs after hip arthroplasty between January 2012 and December 2022 and further classified them into an APFF group and a typical PFF group according to the revised ASBMR diagnostic criteria for AFF. Moreover, patients who had subtrochanteric or femoral shaft fractures in the same period and met the diagnostic criteria for AFF were recruited and classified into the AFF group. Demographic information, minor features of AFF, comorbidities, history of medication usage, management, and complications were collected and compared among patients with typical PFFs, APFFs, and AFFs. RESULTS: Eleven PFFs were identified as APFFs, and the prevalence of APFFs among PFFs was 9.4%. Significant differences were found in generalized increase in cortical thickness (p = 0.019), prodromal symptoms (p < 0.001), and the incidence of bilateral fractures (p = 0.010) among the groups, where the incidences of these minor features in the APFF group and the AFF group were higher than those in the typical PFF group. Of note, the duration of fracture healing of APFFs was significantly longer than that of typical PFFs and AFFs (p < 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively). In addition, the APFF group and the AFF group had higher proportions of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (p = 0.004 and p = 0.027, respectively), bisphosphonate (BP) usage (p = 0.026 and p < 0.001, respectively), and longer duration of BP usage (p = 0.003 and p = 0.007, respectively) than the typical PFF group. Furthermore, significant differences were found in management (p < 0.001) and complication rate (p = 0.020) among the groups, and the rate of complications in the APFF group and the AFF group was higher than that in the typical PFF group. CONCLUSIONS: APFFs not only fulfilled the mandatory and major diagnostic criteria for AFF but also had many clinical characteristics, management and prognosis distinguishing them from typical PFFs but resembling AFFs; hence, the diagnostic criteria for AFF might be revised to incorporate APFF as a distinct subtype of the condition.

Atypical Periprosthetic Femoral Fracture Associated With Prolonged Bisphosphonate Therapy: A Two-Centered Retrospective Case Series and Literature Review.

To date, atypical periprosthetic femoral fractures (APFFs) are not well-understood due to a relatively small number of studies on the topic. Moreover, there is a paucity of guidance regarding the appropriate treatment strategy. We would therefore like to present and analyze a series of five APFF cases (one incomplete APFF and four complete APFFs) that were treated in two university hospitals; a review of the literature is also provided. The results provide additional and useful information regarding the treatment strategy for APFFs.

Atypical periprosthetic femoral fracture associated with long-term bisphosphonate therapy.

BACKGROUND: Atypical femoral fracture is one of the many complications after the long-term use of bisphosphonates. The American Society for Bone and Mineral Research has officially excluded periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) from the definition of atypical femoral fractures (AFFs). Several case reports found that PFFs can occur with characteristics similar to those of AFFs. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the proportion of atypical fractures among Vancouver type B1 fractures, and to determine the association between the long-term use of bisphosphonates and the occurrence of atypical periprosthetic femoral fractures (APFFs). METHODS: In this retrospective study, we reviewed 41 patients with Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic fractures between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2018. We classified them into two groups, namely atypical and typical PFFs, based on the fracture morphology. We noted the proportion of atypical periprosthetic fractures among B1 fractures and identified risk factors. RESULTS: Among the 41 PFFs, 5 (13%) fractures were classified as atypical PFF based on the radiological characteristics. The longer duration of bisphosphonate use was probably the only independent risk factor that significantly increases the occurrence of APFF (p = 0.03, 0.08 (CI 0.008 - 0.16)). There were no significant differences in age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, corticosteroid use, positioning of the femoral stem, the method of fixation (cemented or cementless) and time lapse from before the primary prosthesis implantation to the PFF in the development of atypical fracture type. CONCLUSIONS: There seems to be a correlation between the long-term intake of bisphosphonates and the atypical periprosthetic fracture. Atypical femoral fracture can also occur in the periprosthetic form. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Study number: 22/2019-SZTE, http://www.klinikaikutatas.hu/hu/kutatasetika/jovahagyott-vizsgalatok-koezerdeku-adatai/category/25-jovahagyott-vizsgalatok-kozerdeku-adatai-rkeb-2019.html?download=985:22-2019 .

Prevalence and Characteristics of Atypical Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures.

Bisphosphonate use has been associated with atypical femoral fractures (AFFs), defined by the American Society of Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) Task Force criteria, which currently exclude periprosthetic fractures. The objectives of this study were to establish the prevalence of atypical periprosthetic femoral fractures (APFFs) in patients with hip and knee arthroplasties and to determine the clinical and radiological risk factors associated with these fractures. We performed a retrospective radiological review of all femoral fractures between January 1, 2006, and March 31, 2015, in Quebec City, Canada. Patients who sustained a periprosthetic femoral fracture (PFF) were identified and included in this study. We used the ASBMR Task Force criteria to identify atypical fractures and establish their prevalence. Data from medical records and radiological assessments of the femoral anatomy, the characteristics of the fracture, and the positioning of the prosthesis were collected. The prevalence of APFFs among PFFs was 8.3% (11/133). A strong association with bisphosphonates (p = 0.007) was observed, as well as an increased risk of APFFs among alendronate users compared to risedronate users (p = 0.04). A transverse fracture (p < 0.0001), a periosteal thickening of the lateral cortex at the fracture (p < 0.0001), a unicortical fracture (p = 0.02), and prodromal symptoms (p = 0.03) were associated with APFFs. The type of implant, its positioning, and the femoral geometry did not appear to be risk factors for APFFs compared to PFFs. © 2018 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Frequency and associated factor of atypical periprosthetic femoral fracture after hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Atypical femoral fracture (AFF) is a serious complication after the use of bisphosphonates, and periprosthetic femoral fracture (PFF) appeared as a common complication after hip arthroplasty, especially in senile patients. Although American Society for Bone and Mineral Research has excluded PFFs from the definition of AFFs, several case reports found PFF patients undergoing bisphosphonate treatment, have fractures resembling AFF and the authors suggested that AFF can also occur in operated femurs after hip arthroplasty. To date, the frequency and risk factors of atypical PFF are unknown. The purpose of our study was (1) to evaluate the proportion of atypical PFF among Vancouver type B PFFs, and (2) to determine the association between occurrence of atypical PFF and use of bisphosphonate. METHODS: We reviewed medical records and radiographs of 67 Vancouver type B PFFs (67 patients) due to low-energy trauma and classified them into atypical PFF group and ordinary PFF group. We calculated the proportion of atypical PFFs among PFFs and identified risk factors for atypical PFF. RESULTS: Among the 67 PFFs, 7 fractures (10.4%) were classified as atypical PFF. Longer duration of bisphosphonate use was an independent risk factor of atypical PFF. (Odds ratio 2.600, 95% CI 1.184-5.709, p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: In accordance with wide use of bisphosphonate, atypical PFFs after hip arthroplasty are not rare anymore. Physicians should suspect the atypical PFF, when they meet low-energy fracture in bisphosphonate users, and radiographs show features of AFF.