Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Analysis of complications in 97 periprosthetic Vancouver B2 fractures treated either by internal fixation or revision arthroplasty.
Eckardt, H; Windischbauer, D; Morgenstern, M; Stoffel, K; Clauss, M.
Afiliación
  • Eckardt H; Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Basel University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland. henrikeckardt@gmail.com.
  • Windischbauer D; Crossklinik, Clinic for Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Basel, Switzerland. henrikeckardt@gmail.com.
  • Morgenstern M; Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Basel University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland.
  • Stoffel K; Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Basel University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland.
  • Clauss M; Center for Musculoskeletal Infections, Basel University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg ; 144(4): 1647-1653, 2024 Apr.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38400900
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

The treatment of Vancouver B2 periprosthetic fractures after hip arthroplasty is still a matter of debate. Revision Arthroplasty (RA) was long thought to be the treatment of choice, however several recent papers suggested that Open Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF) is a viable option for selected B2 fractures. Complication rates of 14-26% have been reported following surgical treatment of B2 fractures. No significant difference between RA and ORIF in the complication rates nor in the functional outcome was observed.

METHOD:

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 97 consecutive Vancouver B2 fractures treated according to the algorithm at our institution from 2007 to 2020 and recorded complications and patient specific data.

RESULT:

From the 97 patient, 45 fractures were treated with RA while 52 fractures were treated with ORIF. Thirteen patients in the RA group had a complication that needed revision (28%) and 11 patients in the ORIF group needed revision (21%). There was no significant difference between complication rates. The reason for failure in the 13 RA patients were infection (n = 4), stem subsidence (n = 1), refracture after a new fall (n = 3), secondary dislocation of the greater trochanter (n = 1) and dislocation (n = 4). The reason for failure in the 11 ORIF patients that were revised were infection (n = 5), persistent symptomatic stem loosening (n = 3) and refracture (n = 3) after a new fall.

CONCLUSION:

ORIF can be used to revise cemented and non-cemented shafts in more than half of Vancouver B2 fractures with no difference in complication rates when compared to RA. A periprosthetic fracture around the hip has a 21-28% risk of a re-operation after revision surgery with infection and re-fracture after a new fall being the most frequent cause of re-operation.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Cadera / Fracturas Periprotésicas / Fracturas del Fémur Idioma: En Revista: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Cadera / Fracturas Periprotésicas / Fracturas del Fémur Idioma: En Revista: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article