The incidence of postoperative periprosthetic femoral fracture following total hip replacement: An analysis of UK National Joint Registry and Hospital Episodes statistics data.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative periprosthetic femoral fracture (POPFF) after total hip replacement (THR) requires complex surgery and is associated with a high morbidity, mortality, and cost. Although the United Kingdom based National Joint Registry (NJR) captures over 95% of THRs treated with revision, before June 2023 it did not capture POPFF treated with fixation. We aimed to estimate the incidence and epidemiology of POPFF treated with either surgery in England. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a mandatory, prospective database (NJR) linked to Hospital Episode Statistics (HES). All linkable primary THRs between 01/01/2004 and 31/12/2020 were included. Revision or fixation of POPFF were identified using a combination of procedural and diagnosis codes. We identified 809,832 THRs representing 5,542,332 prosthesis years at risk. A total of 5,100 POPFF were identified that had been surgically treated by revision, fixation, or both, and 2,831 of these fractures were treated with fixation alone, meaning 56% were not represented with revision data alone. The incidence of POPFF needing surgery was 0.92 (95% CI 0.90, 0.95) per 1,000 prostheses years. This incidence was higher in patients over the age of 70 at the time of primary THR (1.31 [95% CI 1.26, 1.35] per 1,000 prostheses years) and for patients who underwent THR for hip fracture (2.19 [95% CI 1.97, 2.42] per 1,000 prostheses years). This incidence appears to be increasing year on year. The cumulative probability of sustaining a POPFF within 10 years of THR was 1% and over 15% of patients died within 1 year of surgery for a POPFF. CONCLUSIONS: To date, the incidence of POPFF may have been underestimated with over 50% of cases missed if the case identification in this study is correct. After including these cases, we observed that POPFF is the largest reason for major reoperation following THR and patients sustaining these injuries have a high risk of death. The prevention and treatment of POPFF and requires further resource allocation and research.

Total knee arthroplasty and periprosthetic distal femoral fracture: looking beyond the osteoporosis to previous osteoporotic fracture.

Osteoporosis increases the risk of periprosthetic distal femoral fractures after TKA, especially in patients with a history of osteoporotic fractures. Therefore, careful assessment and proper treatment of osteoporosis need and the importance of taking osteoporotic medication needs to be recognized by the patients following primary TKA. PURPOSE: Osteoporosis is a risk factor for fractures, including those of the hip, vertebrae, and distal radius; however, the association between osteoporosis and periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has not been much investigated. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the association of the presence of systemic osteoporosis with periprosthetic fractures after TKA. METHODS: This study included 34 patients with periprosthetic fractures following primary TKA and 106 controls matched for age and sex. Bone mineral density was evaluated at the femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine using dual X-ray absorptiometry. Medical records were reviewed for age; sex; body mass index; smoking; rheumatoid arthritis, endocrine diseases, and cardiovascular diseases; history of glucocorticoid use; medication for osteoporosis; and history of previous osteoporotic fracture. In addition, anterior femoral notching after TKA was evaluated. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to determine factors associated with periprosthetic fracture. RESULTS: The prevalence of osteoporosis in the fracture group was higher than that in the control group (61.8% vs. 40.6%, p=0.045). The rate of medication for osteoporosis was significantly low in the fracture group (47.6 % vs 76.7%, p=0.026). History of previous osteoporotic fracture (odds ratio [OR], 9.1; p=0.015) and osteoporosis (OR, 3.6; p=0.013) were significant risk factors for periprosthetic fractures after TKA. Medication for osteoporosis could decrease the risk of periprosthetic fracture (OR 0.3; p=0.020). CONCLUSION: Osteoporosis is a major risk factor for periprosthetic distal femoral fractures after TKA. Therefore, careful assessment and proper treatment of osteoporosis need and the importance of taking osteoporotic medication needs to be recognized to the patients following primary TKA, especially in patients with a history of osteoporotic fracture. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level III.

Femoral Component Design Is Associated With the Risk of Periprosthetic Femur Fracture After Cementless THA in Patients 65 Years or Older.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic femur fracture is a known complication after THA. The associated risk of cementless femoral component design for periprosthetic femur fracture in a registry population of patients older than 65 years has yet to be clearly identified. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is femoral stem geometry associated with the risk of periprosthetic femur fracture after cementless THA? (2) Is the presence or absence of a collar on cementless femoral implant designs associated with the risk of periprosthetic femur fracture after THA? METHODS: We analyzed American Joint Replacement Registry data from 2012 to March 2020. Unique to this registry is the high use of cementless femoral stems in patients 65 years and older. We identified 266,040 primary cementless THAs during the study period in patients with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis and surgeries linked to supplemental Centers for Medicare and Medicaid data where available. Patient demographics, procedure dates, and reoperation for periprosthetic femur fracture with revision or open reduction and internal fixation were recorded. The main analysis was performed comparing the Kheir and Chen classification: 42% (112,231 of 266,040) were single-wedge, 22% (57,758 of 266,040) were double-wedge, and 24% (62,983 of 266,040) were gradual taper/metadiaphyseal-filling cementless femoral components, which yielded a total of 232,972 primary cementless THAs. An additional analysis compared cementless stems with collars (20% [47,376 of 232,972]) with those with collarless designs (80% [185,596 of 232,972]). A Cox proportional hazard regression analysis with the competing risk of death was used to evaluate the association of design and fracture risk while adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: After controlling for the potentially confounding variables of age, sex, geographic region, osteoporosis or osteopenia diagnosis, hospital volume, and the competing risk of death, we found that compared with gradual taper/metadiaphyseal-filling stems, single-wedge designs were associated with a greater risk of periprosthetic femur fracture (HR 2.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2 to 3.9]; p < 0. 001). Compared with gradual taper/metadiaphyseal-filling stems, double-wedge designs showed an increased risk of periprosthetic femur fracture (HR 3.0 [95% CI 2.2 to 4.0]; p < 0. 001). Collarless stems showed an increased risk of periprosthetic fracture compared with collared stems (HR 7.8 [95% CI 4.1 to 15]; p < 0. 001). CONCLUSION: If cementless femoral fixation is used for THA in patients 65 years or older, surgeons should consider using gradual taper/metadiaphyseal-filling and collared stem designs because they are associated with a lower risk of periprosthetic femur fracture. Future investigations should compare gradual taper/metadiaphyseal-filling and collared cementless designs with cemented fixation in this population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Intramedullary Nailing of Intertrochanteric Femoral Fractures in a Level I Trauma Center in Finland: What Complications Can be Expected?

BACKGROUND: Intertrochanteric hip fractures are one of the most common fractures in older people, and the number is estimated to increase. These fractures are often treated with intramedullary nailing; however, various complications have been reported. It is important to identify the potential complications and investigate whether the choice of implant and patient-related factors are associated with the risk of complications to develop better strategies for preventing them. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) In the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures with intramedullary nailing, what are the risks of major complications and 30-day mortality? (2) Which implant types are associated with greater odds of major complications? (3) Which patient-related factors are associated with increased odds of major complications? METHODS: In this retrospective, comparative study, we reviewed the health records of 2397 patients with a femoral fracture treated at one Level I trauma center between January 2014 and November 2020. Of those, we considered patients who were treated with intramedullary nailing for an intertrochanteric fracture after sustaining a low-energy injury as potentially eligible. Based on this criterion, 53% (1279) were eligible; a further 47% (1118) were excluded because the fixation method was other than intramedullary nailing, the fracture pattern was other than intertrochanteric fracture, or the fracture was caused by a high-energy injury mechanism. Another 4% (97) were excluded because they had incomplete datasets because of follow-up less than 12 months, leaving 49% (1182) for analysis. During the study period, intramedullary nails were generally used to treat nearly all intertrochanteric fractures at our hospital. The risk of complications was then assessed by chart review. Acute myocardial ischemia, cutout, nail breakage, pulmonary embolism, sepsis, stroke, and wound infection were defined as major complications. Cutout, nail breakage, and wound infection were defined as major complications leading to reoperation. To examine the association of implant type and major complications, a logistic regression analysis was performed. Additionally, the risks of major complications leading to reoperation were compared between implants. Finally, a univariable logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the association between patient-related factors and major complications. RESULTS: The overall proportion of patients experiencing complications was 16% (183 of 1182), and the crude percentage of 30-day mortality was 9% (107 of 1182) based on the hospital`s medical records. After controlling for patient-related factors such as disease, age, and smoking, we found that nail type was not associated with odds of major complications leading to reoperation (Gamma3: OR 0.86 [95% CI 0.44 to 1.67]; p = 0.67; Trochanteric Fixation Nail: OR 0.61 [95% CI 0.2 to 1.53]; p = 0.33; Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation: OR 0.55 [95% CI 0.16 to 1.49]; p = 0.29) compared with the Trochanteric Fixation Nail Advanced. Anticoagulation (OR 1.70 [95% CI 1.11 to 2.59]; p = 0.01), congestive heart failure (OR 1.91 [95% CI 1.13 to 3.11]; p = 0.01), and hypertension (OR 1.67 [95% CI 1.08 to 2.63]; p = 0.02) were associated with a major complication. Liver disease (OR 5.19 [95% CI 0.78 to 20.8]; p = 0.04) was associated with a major complication leading to reoperation. CONCLUSION: This study provides a better understanding of the occurrence of surgical and medical complications after intramedullary nailing of intertrochanteric fractures. The new-generation nail types are comparable options based on the risk of reoperation. Anticoagulation, congestive heart failure, and hypertension were associated with major complications, highlighting the need for careful management and monitoring of these comorbidities during intramedullary nailing procedures.Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study.

What Are the Mortality, Infection, and Nonunion Rates After Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures in the United States?

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic femoral fractures are a serious complication that put a high burden on patients. However, comprehensive analyses of their incidence, mortality, and complication rates based on large-registry data are scarce. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this large-database study, we asked: (1) What is the incidence of periprosthetic femoral fractures in patients 65 years and older in the United States? (2) What are the rates of mortality, infection, and nonunion, and what factors are associated with these outcomes? METHODS: In this retrospective, comparative, large-database study, periprosthetic femoral fractures occurring between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2019, were identified from Medicare physician service records encompassing services rendered in medical offices, clinics, hospitals, emergency departments, skilled nursing facilities, and other healthcare institutions from approximately 2.5 million enrollees. These were grouped into proximal, distal, and shaft fractures after TKA and THA. We calculated the incidence of periprosthetic femur fractures by year. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) were calculated by dividing the incidence in 2019 by the incidence in 2010. The Kaplan-Meier method with Fine and Gray subdistribution adaptation was used to calculate the cumulative incidence rates of mortality, infection, and nonunion. Semiparametric Cox regression was applied with 23 measures as covariates to determine factors associated with these outcomes. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2019, the incidence of periprosthetic femoral fractures increased steeply (TKA for distal fractures: IRR 3.3 [95% CI 1 to 9]; p = 0.02; THA for proximal fractures: IRR 2.3 [95% CI 1 to 4]; p = 0.01). One-year mortality rates were 23% (95% CI 18% to 28%) for distal fractures treated with THA, 21% (95% CI 19% to 24%) for proximal fractures treated with THA, 22% (95% CI 19% to 26%) for shaft fractures treated with THA, 21% (95% CI 18% to 25%) for distal fractures treated with TKA , 22% (95% CI 17% to 28%) for proximal fractures treated with TKA, and 24% (95% CI 19% to 29%) for shaft fractures treated with TKA. The 5-year mortality rate was 63% (95% CI 54% to 70%) for distal fractures treated with THA, 57% (95% CI 54% to 62%) for proximal fractures treated with THA, 58% (95% CI 52% to 63%) for shaft fractures treated with THA, 57% (95% CI 52% to 62%) for distal fractures treated with TKA , 57% (95% CI 49% to 65%) for proximal fractures treated with TKA, and 57% (95% CI 49% to 64%) for shaft fractures treated with TKA. Age older than 75 years, male sex, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR 1.48 [95% CI 1.32 to 1.67] after THA and HR 1.45 [95% CI 1.20 to 1.74] after TKA), cerebrovascular disease after THA, chronic kidney disease (HR 1.28 [95% CI 1.12 to 1.46] after THA and HR 1.50 [95% CI 1.24 to 1.82] after TKA), diabetes mellitus, morbid obesity, osteoporosis, and rheumatoid arthritis were clinical risk factors for an increased risk of mortality. Within the first 2 years, fracture-related infections occurred in 5% (95% CI 4% to 7%) of patients who had distal fractures treated with THA, 5% [95% CI 5% to 6%]) of patients who had proximal fractures treated with THA, 6% (95% CI 5% to 7%) of patients who had shaft fractures treated with THA, 6% (95% CI 5% to 7%) of patients who had distal fractures treated with TKA , 7% (95% CI 5% to 9%) of patients who had proximal fractures treated with TKA, and 6% (95% CI 4% to 8%) of patients who had shaft fractures treated with TKA. Nonunion or malunion occurred in 3% (95% CI 2% to 4%) of patients with distal fractures treated with THA, 1% (95% CI 1% to 2%) of patients who had proximal fractures treated with THA, 2% (95% CI 1% to 3%) of patients who had shaft fractures treated with THA, 4% (95% CI 3% to 5%) of those who had distal fractures treated with TKA, , 2% (95% CI 1% to 4%) of those who had proximal fractures treated with TKA, and 3% (95% CI 2% to 4%) of those who had shaft fractures treated with TKA. CONCLUSION: An increasing number of periprosthetic fractures were observed during the investigated period. At 1 and 5 years after periprosthetic femur fracture, there was a substantial death rate in patients with Medicare. Conditions including cerebrovascular illness, chronic kidney disease, diabetes mellitus, morbid obesity, osteoporosis, and rheumatoid arthritis are among the risk factors for increased mortality. After the surgical care of periprosthetic femur fractures, the rates of fracture-related infection and nonunion were high, resulting in a serious risk to affected patients. Patient well-being can be enhanced by an interdisciplinary team in geriatric traumatology and should be improved to lower the risk of postoperative death. Additionally, it is important to ensure that surgical measures to prevent fracture-related infections are followed diligently. Furthermore, there is a need to continue improving implants and surgical techniques to avoid often-fatal complications such as fracture-associated infections and nonunion, which should be addressed in further studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Forces required to dynamize sliding screws in gamma nail and selfdynamizable internal fixator.

BACKGROUND: Single limb support phase of the gait-cycle in patients who are treated for a pertrochanteric fracture is characterized by transversal loads acting on the lag screw, tending to block its dynamization. If the simultaneous axial force overcomes transversal loads of the sliding screw, the dynamization can still occur. METHODS: Biomechanical investigation was performed for three types of dynamic implants: Gamma Nail, and two types of Selfdynamizable Internal Fixators (SIF) - SIF-7 (containing two 7 mm non-cannulated sliding screws), and SIF-10 (containing one 10 mm cannulated sliding screw). Contact surface between the stem and the sliding screws is larger in SIF implants than in Gamma Nail, as the stem of Gamma Nail is hollow. A special testing device was designed for this study to provide simultaneous application of a controlled sliding screws bending moment and a controlled transversal load on sliding screws (Qt) without using of weights. Using each of the implants, axial forces required to initiate sliding screws dynamization (Qa) were applied and measured using a tensile testing machine, for several values of sliding screws bending moment. Standard least-squares method was used to present the results through the linear regression model. RESULTS: Positive correlation between Qt and Qa was confirmed (p < 0.05). While performing higher bending moments in all the tested implants, Qa was higher than it could be provided by the body weight. It was the highest in Gamma Nail, and the lowest in SIF-10. CONCLUSIONS: A larger contact surface between a sliding screw and stem results in lower forces required to initiate dynamization of a sliding screw. Patients treated for a pertrochanteric fracture by a sliding screw internal fixation who have longer femoral neck or higher body weight could have different programme of early postoperative rehabilitation than lighter patients or patients with shorter femoral neck.

Jaffe-Campanacci syndrome; a case series and review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Jaffe-Campanacci syndrome is a rare syndrome, characterized by multiple non-ossifying fibromas (NOF) and cafe-au-lait patches. The name was coined in 1982 by Mirra after Jaffe who first described the case in 1958. Although it's suggested there is a relation with Neurofibromatosis type 1, there is still no consensus on whether Jaffe-Campanacci syndrome is a subtype or variant of neurofibromatosis-1(NF-1). CASE PRESENTATION: In this article, we present a case series of 2 patients. The first case is a 13-year-old male with Jaffe-Campanacci syndrome who presented with a distal femur fracture. His father had positive features of both Jaffe-Campanacci syndrome and NF-1, while his sister only had features of NF-1, so we presented both. CONCLUSION: Jaffe-Campanacci has a clear relationship with type 1 neurofibromatosis, which still has to be genetically established. Due to the presence of several large non-ossifying fibromas of the long bones, it is linked to a significant risk of pathological fractures. We concur with previous authors, that an osseous screening program should be performed for all patients with newly diagnosed type 1 neurofibromatosis, to identify non-ossifying fibromas and assess the potential for pathological fracture. Moreover, siblings of patients with NF-1 should be screened for multiple NOFs that may carry a high risk of pathological fractures.

Delayed femoral artery injury caused by heterotopic ossification: a rare case report and review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Arterial injury caused by heterotopic ossification (HO) following fractures is rarely reported, yet it can have catastrophic consequences. This case report presents a unique instance of femoral artery injury and hematoma organization, occurring a decade after intramedullary nail fixation for a femoral shaft fracture complicated by HO. CASE PRESENTATION: A 56-year-old male presented with right femoral artery injury and organized hematoma, a decade after suffering bilateral femoral shaft fractures with mild head injury in a traffic accident. He had received intramedullary nailing for the right femoral shaft fracture and plate fixation for the left side in a local hospital. Physical examination revealed two firm, palpable masses with clear boundaries, limited mobility, and no tenderness. Peripheral arterial pulses were intact. Radiography demonstrated satisfactory fracture healing, while a continuous high-density shadow was evident along the inner and posterior aspect of the right thigh. Computed tomography angiography identified a large mixed-density mass (16.8 × 14.8 × 20.7 cm) on the right thigh's medial side, featuring central calcification and multiple internal calcifications. The right deep femoral artery coursed within this mass, with a smaller lesion noted on the posterior thigh. Surgical consultation with a vascular surgeon led to planned intervention. The smaller mass was completely excised, but the larger one partially, as it encased the femoral artery. The inability to remove all HO was due to excessive bleeding. Postoperatively, the patient experienced no complications, and one-year follow-up revealed a favorable recovery with restoration of full right lower limb mobility. CONCLUSION: This case underscores the potential gravity of vascular injury associated with heterotopic ossification. Surgeons should remain vigilant regarding the risk of vascular injury during HO excision.

Fixation Strategies for Periprosthetic Fractures With Stable Implants.

The fixation of periprosthetic fractures remains challenging and controversial. It is important to achieve consensus opinions regarding the management of stable periprosthetic fractures with internal fixation. Key strategies to optimize surgical decision making and fixation and manage complications following these difficult injuries are addressed.

Incidences and Outcomes of Operatively Treated Interprosthetic Femoral Fractures Compared to Vancouver Type C and Rorabeck Type II Fractures.

BACKGROUND: This case-control study evaluated the incidences and outcomes of interprosthetic femoral fracture (IPFF) (Group I) and performed comparisons with Vancouver type C (Group II) and Rorabeck type II (Group III) periprosthetic femoral fractures (PPFF) occurring at similar anatomic sites. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed for all patients who had a previously implanted total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA), who lived in the hospital district and had undergone surgery due to PPFF. A total of 153 PPFFs [Group I (n = 31), Group II (n = 21), and Group III (n = 108)] were included. The annual incidences of PPFFs were summarized per 100,000 individuals. The risks of complications, reoperations, and mortalities were evaluated for all groups. RESULTS: The mean population-based annual incidence was 0.9 per 100,000 person years for Group I, 0.7 per 100,000 person years for Group II, and 3.1 per 100,000 person years for Group III. A total of 25 of 153 (16%) major complications were found and 23 of 153 (13%) cases resulted in a revision surgery. The cumulative incidence of death in Group I was 50.4% at 10 years, in Group II it was 63.8% at 10 years, and in Group III it was 74.9% at 10 years. CONCLUSION: The annual incidence of the IPFF almost doubled while the incidence of Vancouver type C stayed stable and Rorabeck type II incidence increased 5-fold. Most of the major complications occurred in IPFF group, while Rorabeck type II patients had the worst survival.

Risk Factors for Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures After Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to identify the risk factors of periprosthetic femoral fracture (PFF) after cementless total hip arthroplasty and rank them based on importance. METHODS: The age, sex, body mass index (BMI), osteoporosis, canal flare index (CFI), canal bone ratio (CBR), canal calcar ratio (CCR), stem design, and stem canal fill ratio (P1, P2, P3, and P4) of the proximal femoral medullary cavity of 111 total hip arthroplasty patients who had PFF and 388 who did not have PFF were analyzed. Independent-samples student t-tests were used for continuous variables, and Chi-square tests were used for categorical variables. The importance rankings of influencing factors were assessed using a random forest algorithm. Dimensionally reduced variables were then incorporated into a binary logistic regression model to determine the PFF-related risk factors. RESULTS: The mean age, BMI, CBR, CCR, and incidence of osteoporosis were higher in cases of PFF (all P < .001), while the mean CFI, P1, P2, P3, and P4 were lower in cases of PFF (P < .001, P = .033, P = .008, P < .001, and P < .001, respectively). Additionally, the stem design was also statistically associated with PFF (P < .001). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that advanced age, higher BMI, osteoporosis, stem design, lower CFI, higher CBR, higher CCR, lower P1, lower P2, lower P3, and lower P4 were the risk factors of PFF (P < .001, P < .001, P < .001, P < .001, P < .001, P = .010, P < .001, P = .002, P < .001, P < .001, and P = .007, respectively). The ranked importance of the risk factors for PFF was P3, CFI, osteoporosis, CBR, age, P4, P1, stem design, CCR, BMI, and P2. CONCLUSIONS: Lower P3, lower CFI, osteoporosis, higher CBR, advanced age, lower P4, lower P1, stem design, higher CCR, higher BMI, and lower P2 increased the risk of PFF.

Distal Femoral Stress Fractures Has High Operation Rates in Adolescent and Young Adult Athletes.

BACKGROUND: Although stress fractures of the distal femur are rare, symptoms can overlap with other peri-articular knee pathology, delaying diagnosis. Untreated stress fractures have the potential to progress into completed fractures with a higher likelihood for requiring surgery and longer recovery times in otherwise healthy adolescents and young adults. This case series represents the largest cohort of adolescent athletes with distal femoral stress fractures who presented with activity-related knee pain. METHODS: Patients treated nonoperatively and operatively for metaphyseal distal femur stress fractures at a tertiary referral center over a four-year period were retrospectively identified from the medical record. RESULTS: Eight patients (mean age 16.8 y; range 14 to 22 y; 87.5% male; mean body mass index [BMI] 20.9) with a total of 10 distal femur stress fractures were identified. All patients were involved in competitive sports or military training. There was an average of 3.8 encounters with a medical provider between presentation with activity-related knee pain and diagnosis with distal femur stress fracture. All except 1 patient (87.5%) were initially incorrectly diagnosed with another type of peri-articular knee pathology. Six stress fractures (60%) were treated conservatively with protected weight bearing, activity modification, and gradual return to activity. Four completed stress fractures (40%) required operative fixation-3 healed uneventfully, while 1 had an asymptomatic delayed union. Vitamin D insufficiency (<30 ng/mL) was identified in 7 of 8 patients (87.5%) and 3 patients (37.5%) had an underweight BMI (<18.5). The mean clinical follow-up was 13.1 weeks (range, 2.8 to 32.0 wk). CONCLUSIONS: High clinical suspicion for distal femoral stress fractures is needed to avoid misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis in young, active individuals with activity-related knee pain refractory to conservative management. In this patient population, activity-related knee pain recalcitrant to activity modification, rest, and physical therapy warrants further workup with magnetic resonance imaging and orthopaedic evaluation. Though rare, misdiagnosis can result in catastrophic fractures with prolonged rehabilitation needs. An open line of communication and streamlined access for referral between primary care providers and orthopaedic surgeons is critical in preventing misdiagnosis and delayed treatment. Furthermore, the treatment of concomitant metabolic disorders and nutritional deficiency should not be neglected when treating distal femoral stress fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level-IV (case series).

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Studies Comparing the Rate of Post-operative Periprosthetic Fracture Following Hip Arthroplasty With a Polished Taper Slip versus Composite Beam Stem.

BACKGROUND: We compared the incidence of postoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures (POPFF) following hip arthroplasty with either a cemented polished taper slip (PTS) stem or a cemented composite beam (CB) stem in comparative studies. METHODS: A systematic review of comparative studies, written in English and published in peer-reviewed journals since the year 2000, was conducted. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.The overall study qualities were good. There were 913,021 patients from 18 cohorts included in the meta-analysis. There were 294,540 patients who received a CB stem and 618,481 received a PTS stem. Cohorts were classified as high- or low-risk for POPFF based on patient risk factors. A metanalysis was performed using a random effects model, and the relative incidence with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was reported. RESULTS: The patients at low risk of POPFF had an incidence rate ratio of 3.14 (CI: 2.48, 3.98) for the PTS group versus the CB group. Whereas, the patients at high risk of POPFF had an incidence rate ratio of 9.87 (CI: 3.63, 26.80) for the PTS group versus the CB group. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of POPFF is lower when hip arthroplasty was performed using a CB stem versus a PTS stem. This protective effect was greatest in patients who had a higher risk of POPFF. Surgeons should consider the effect of cemented stem choice on the risk of subsequent periprosthetic femur fracture, particularly in frail or elderly patients who are at a higher risk of postoperative periprosthetic femoral fracture.

Higher Annual Total Hip Arthroplasty Volume Decreases the Risk of Intraoperative Periprosthetic Femur Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic femur fracture (PFF) is a complication of total hip arthroplasty (THA). These occur intraoperatively or postoperatively, and documented risk factors of PFFs include women, age greater than 65 years, cementless stems, and inflammatory arthropathies. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to assess the relationship of years of surgical experience and surgeon annual THA volume on intraoperative and postoperative PFFs. METHODS: Data were collected from a database query, and PFFs were identified as either intraoperative or postoperative. Intraoperative and postoperative PFFs were both compared to a control group of non-PFF patients. Years of surgical experience at the time of surgery and annual THA volume for the primary surgeon were calculated for all cases. Logistic regression analyses were used to calculate odds ratios for each of the surgeon variables when adjusted for patient demographics. RESULTS: Thirty-seven intraoperative and 108 postoperative PFFs were identified and compared to 7,629 controls. From regression analyses, high-volume surgeons (≥50 THA/year) had lower odds of intraoperative PFF (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.40, P = .020) but not postoperative PFF (aOR = 1.02, P = .921). Surgeon experience (≥15 years since board certification at the time of surgery), was not significantly related to either PFF outcomes. For patient factors, age ≥65 years (aOR = 2.30, P < .001) and women (aOR = 2.69, P < .001) were both significant predictors of postoperative PFFs only. CONCLUSION: Surgeons who performed 50 or more THAs per year had significantly fewer intraoperative PFFs than surgeons who did less than 50 THAs per year. Surgeon experience was not significantly related to PFFs.

Early Periprosthetic Femur Fractures After Primary Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty: High Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection and Subsequent Reoperation.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic femur fracture (PFF) following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a leading cause of early reoperation. The objective of this study was to compare rates of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and reoperation following PFFs occurring early postoperatively to those that occurred late. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 173 consecutive surgically managed PFFs following primary THA. Cases were categorized as "early" if they occurred within 90 days of THA (n = 117) or "late" if they occurred following the initial 90 days (n = 56). Mean age at time of PFF was 68 years (range, 26 to 96) and 60% were women. Mean body mass index was 29 (range, 16 to 52). Mean follow-up was 2 years (range, 0 to 13). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis estimated cumulative incidences of PJI and reoperation. RESULTS: Early PFFs had higher 2-year cumulative incidence of PJI (11% versus 0%, P < .001) and reoperation (24% versus 13%, P = .110). Following early PFF, 27 patients required reoperation (ie, 13 for PJI, 5 for instability, 2 for re-fracture, 2 for painful hardware, 2 for non-union, 1 for adverse local tissue reaction, 1 for aseptic loosening, and 1 for leg-length discrepancy). Following late PFF, 5 patients required reoperation (ie, 3 for instability, 1 for re-fracture, and 1 for non-union). CONCLUSIONS: There are greater incidences of PJIs and overall reoperations following early PFFs compared to late PFFs after THA. In addition to focusing efforts on prevention of early PFFs, surgeons should consider antiseptic interventions to mitigate the increased risk of PJI after treatment of early PFF.

High Rate of Unplanned Reoperation for Interprosthetic Femur Fractures After Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Interprosthetic femur fractures (IPFFs) are a rare, but devastating complication following total joint arthroplasty. There is limited evidence to help guide their management. The purpose of this study was to describe the features, treatment, and outcomes of surgically managed IPFFs. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 75 patients who had 76 IPFFs. The mean age at the time of IPFF was 75 years (range, 29 to 94), and 78% were women. The mean body mass index was 30 (range, 19 to 51), and the mean follow-up was 3 years (range, 0 to 14). There were 16 Vancouver B1 fractures, 28 Vancouver B2 fractures, 2 Vancouver B3 fractures, and 30 Vancouver C fractures. All B1 fractures underwent open reduction internal fixation (ORIF). All Vancouver B2 and B3 fractures underwent revision arthroplasty, including 1 proximal femur replacement and 1 total femur replacement. Vancouver C fractures were treated with ORIF (n = 20), distal femoral replacement (n = 9), and in 1 case, total femur replacement (n = 1). Kaplan-Meier survivorship was used to calculate 2-year survival free from all-cause reoperation and periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). RESULTS: The 2-year survivorship-free rate from reoperation was 71%. There were 18 reoperations following initial surgical management of the IPFF, including 9 for infection, 3 for refracture, 3 for nonunion, 2 for hardware failure, and 1 for instability. An initial IPFF involving a stemmed femoral total knee arthroplasty component was associated with increased risk for reoperation (P = .007) and PJI (P = .044). There was no difference in survivorship free of reoperation between IPFFs managed with ORIF or revision arthroplasty (P = .72). CONCLUSIONS: An IPFF is a devastating complication following total joint arthroplasty with high reoperation rates, most commonly secondary to PJI. Those IPFFs that occurred between 2 stemmed components were at the highest risk for reoperation.

Risk and Epidemiology of Periprosthetic Knee Fractures After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic knee fractures (PPKFs) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are uncommon, but potentially serious injuries. We analyze the risk and risk factors for a PPKF in standard primary TKA patients who have osteoarthritis and a minimally (cruciate-retaining TKAs without a femoral box cut) or posterior-stabilized TKA. In addition, we report the risk for patients who have other underlying knee disorders and/or a higher level of TKA constraint. METHODS: All primary TKAs were identified from the Danish National Patient Register and the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Register using data between 1997 and 2022. Subsequent fractures were identified through the International Classification of Diseases diagnosis code, Nordic Medico-Statistical Committee procedure code, or indication for revision TKA. RESULTS: We included 120,642 standard primary TKA patients who had 1,659 PPKFs. The cumulated proportions were 0.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3 to 0.4) at 2 years 0.8% (0.7 to 0.8) at 5 years. At 10 years, the cumulated proportion was 1.7% (1.6 to 1.8), with 1.3% in the femur, 0.2% in the patella, and 0.2% in the tibia. Significant risk factors were (hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI]); ipsilateral hip arthroplasty (2.3 [2.0 to 2.6]); women (2.1 [1.8 to 2.4]), osteoporosis (1.4 [1.2 to 1.7]); age 80+ (1.4 [1.3 to 1.6]), uncemented TKA (1.3 (1.1 to 1.5) and Charlson Comorbidity Index score 3+ (1.4 [1.1 to 1.8]). An additional 22,624 primary TKA patients who had other underlying knee disorders and/or a higher level of implant constraint were included with 633 PPKFs. The 10-year cumulated proportions were 8.3% (95% CI 6.9 to 9.8) when the underlying disorder was a previous fracture, 2.8% (2.2 to 3.5) for rheumatic disorders, and 5.2% (2.6 to 10.6) for osteonecrosis. In patients who had condylar constrained knees, it was 6.9% (5.1 to 9.4), and 12.4% (8.0 to 16.04) for hinges. CONCLUSIONS: In standard primary TKA patients, the 10-year cumulated proportion of PPKFs was 1.7%, and ipsilateral hip arthroplasty, women, osteoporosis, advanced age, uncemented TKA and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index increased the risk. Higher risks were observed in non-osteoarthritis patients and/or patients who had a higher level of TKA constraint.

Systemic Osteoporosis and Osteopenia Among Periprosthetic Fractures After Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Most periprosthetic fractures following total hip arthroplasty (THA) are fragility fractures that qualify patients for osteoporosis diagnoses. However, it remains unknown how many patients were diagnosed who had osteoporosis before injury or received the proper evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment after injury. METHODS: We identified 171 Vancouver B2 (109) and B3 (62) periprosthetic femur fractures treated with a modular fluted tapered stem from 2000 to 2018 at 1 institution. The mean patient age was 75 years (range, 35 to 94), 50% were women, and the mean body mass index was 29 (range, 17 to 60). We identified patients who had osteoporosis or osteopenia diagnoses, a fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX), bone mineral density (BMD) testing, an endocrinology consult, and osteoporosis medications. Age-appropriate BMD testing was defined as no later than 1 year after the recommended ages of 65 (women) or 70 years (men). The mean follow-up was 11 years (range, 4 to 21). RESULTS: Falls from standing height caused 94% of fractures and thus, by definition, qualified as osteoporosis-defining events. The prevalence of osteoporosis diagnosis increased from 20% before periprosthetic fracture to 39% after (P < .001). The prevalence of osteopenia diagnosis increased from 13% before the fracture to 24% after (P < .001). The prevalence of either diagnosis increased from 24% before fracture to 44% after (P < .001). No patients had documented FRAX scores before fracture, and only 2% had scores after. The prevalence of BMD testing was 21% before fracture and 22% after (P = .88). By the end of the final follow-up, only 16% had received age-appropriate BMD testing. The proportion of patients who had endocrinology consults increased from 6% before the fracture to 25% after (P < .001). The proportion on bisphosphonate therapy was 19% before fracture and 25% after (P = .08). CONCLUSIONS: Although most periprosthetic fractures following THA are fragility fractures that qualify patients for osteoporosis diagnoses, there remain major gaps in diagnosis, screening, endocrinology follow-up, and treatment. Like nonarthroplasty fragility fractures, a systematic approach is needed after periprosthetic fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Predictive factors for one-year mortality after surgery for periprosthetic femoral fracture: A retrospective multicenter (TRON group) study.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic femoral fracture (PFF) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) or bipolar hip arthroplasty (BHA) represents a challenging situation and the treatment is associated with high rates of complications and mortality. The aims of this multicenter retrospective study were to determine 1-year mortality and to identify predictors associated with mortality, including patient characteristics and surgical factors, in patients undergoing surgery for PFF after THA or BHA. METHODS: We collected 249 cases of PPF after THA or BHA that were treated in our 11 hospitals (named the TRON group) between January 2010 and December 2019. We excluded patients who were conservatively treated, cases in which the 1-year postoperative outcome was unknown, and Vancouver type A cases. Finally, we analyzed 161 patients. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify factors affecting 1-year mortality. Patient-side factors such as age, BMI, fracture type, and preoperative mobility, and surgical factors such as surgical procedure, time to surgery, and operation time were analyzed respectively. RESULTS: Eighteen of 161 patients (11.2%) died one year after surgery. The multivariate Cox regression analysis identified older age, wheelchair status before injury, and operation time as independent predictors of 1-year mortality (older age: hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, 95% CI 1.01-1.15, P = 0.048; wheelchair status: HR 5.82, 95% CI 1.01-33.47, P = 0.049; operation time: [HR] 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.01, P = 0.00929). Meanwhile, fracture type according to the Vancouver classification, body mass index, presence of previous fragility fractures, type of fixation, blood loss during operation, and time to surgery were not independent predictors of 1-year mortality in this analysis. ConclusionThe 1-year mortality rate after surgery for PPFs patients was 11.2%. Factors associated with older and poor activity of daily living (ADL) performance (e.g., wheelchair status before injury), and longer operative time were associated with 1-year mortality after surgery for PPF. Surgeons should carefully plan treatment according to each patient's condition.

Geriatric distal femoral fractures: post-operative complications and nine-year mortality-a retrospective analysis of two tertiary trauma centres.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to estimate the mortality at various post-operative intervals and explore influential variables for these outcomes in elderly patients with distal femur fractures (DFF). METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted across two tertiary care institutions, between 2014 and 2020. The primary outcomes were mortality rates at 30-day, six month, and one year post-surgery. Secondary outcomes included 1-year readmission and reintervention rates along with their correlated complications. RESULTS: A total of 37 DFF in 35 patients was analyzed; average age was 83.6 years (range, 65-98 years). The overall mortality rate at a maximum follow-up of 8.8 years was 74% (26/35 patients). The median survival time was 3.2 years and the survival probability at five years was 27% (95% confidence interval [CI], 13 to 43%). Mortality rates at 30 days, six months, and one year after surgery were 8.6% (3 patients), 23% (8 patients), and 34% (12 patients), respectively. Overall mortality rate was 64% (15/24 patients) for native distal femur fractures, and 92% (13/14 patients) for periprosthetic fractures (p = 0.109). Patients older than 85 years and male gender were identified as risk factors for mortality within the first year post-operatively. CONCLUSION: Elderly fractures have a high mortality at eight years of follow-up. Mortality at one year was much higher than in other studies of the same nature. We did not find statistically significant differences when comparing native bone fractures with periprosthetic fractures. Factors that impact mortality were being a man, advanced age, elevated index comorbidity, and dementia. There is no relationship between the time to be taken to the surgical procedure and mortality results.