Impact of Intraoperative Femoral Fractures During Cemented Hemiarthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fractures.

BACKGROUND: There have been several studies on intraoperative femoral fractures (IFFs) during primary total hip arthroplasty, but it is not well understood how this complication affects the patient population undergoing cemented hemiarthroplasty. This study aimed to analyze the impact of IFFs sustained during cemented hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of femoral neck fractures. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of all patients who were treated for Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association 31B fractures with cemented hemiarthroplasty between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2021, at a single academic level 1 trauma center. An initial cohort was constructed of all patients who sustained an IFF during their surgery, yielding 31 patients after excluding those who sustained a pathologic fracture or had incomplete data. These patients were matched 1:2 on age, sex, and body mass index to patients in a control cohort. The primary outcome measure was implant failure. Secondary outcome measures included complications, all-cause mortality, and radiographic outcomes (subsidence, femoral component loosening, acetabular wear, and heterotopic ossification) postoperatively. RESULTS: Subsequent implant revision was required in 3.2% (n = 1) of patients who sustained an IFF and 1.6% (n = 1) of patients who did not. After adjusting for comorbidities, there was no observed excess risk of implant failure in the fracture cohort when compared to the control cohort (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.30, P = 0.740). There was no observed excess risk of morbidity (HR = 0.69, P = 0.621) or all-cause mortality (HR = 0.23, P = 0.330). Radiographic outcomes also did not significantly differ between the 2 cohorts (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative fractures during cemented hemiarthroplasty do not contribute to an increased risk of secondary surgery, morbidity, or mortality after surgery. They also do not adversely affect radiographic outcomes postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective Comparative Study.

Salvage of failed subtrochanteric fracture fixation in the elderly: revision internal fixation or hip arthroplasty?

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare reoperation rate and clinical outcomes between revision open reduction and internal fixation and hip arthroplasty following failed subtrochanteric fracture fixation. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of patients > 50 years old treated for failed fixation of subtrochanteric fractures with revision ORIF or hip arthroplasty from 2003 to 2023. Primary outcomes included rate of fracture union and reoperations after initial salvage therapy. Secondary outcomes included complications (infection, dislocation, bursitis, implant prominence, implant failure, nonunion), pain, and gait-aid requirements by final follow-up. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were identified: 34 treated with revision ORIF and 10 with hip arthroplasty. The arthroplasty cohort was older (75.4 vs. 66.0 years, p = 0.016) but did not differ from the ORIF cohort in sex, type of initial fixation, or reason for fixation failure. Patients treated with revision ORIF and patients treated with arthroplasty had similar rates of fracture union (85.3% vs. 80.0%, p = 0.772) and reoperation (35.3% vs. 30.0%, p = 0.710). There was no significant difference in rate of additional complications not requiring reoperation (0.0% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.071). The arthroplasty cohort achieved full weightbearing in significantly shorter time than the revision ORIF cohort (3.8 vs. 6.8 weeks, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Both revision ORIF and hip arthroplasty are acceptable options for salvage of failed subtrochanteric fracture fixation in patients greater than 50 years old, but patients should be counseled that although the rate of fracture union is high whether revision ORIF or hip arthroplasty is selected, the rate of reoperation can exceed 1-in-4 patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:  : Level III, Retrospective Comparative Study.

Omega Plate Fixation of Comminuted Olecranon Fractures: Technique and Case Series.

Fixation of olecranon fractures, especially those with minimal proximal bone and those that present with significant comminution, can be technically challenging. Current open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) methods, such as tension band wire (TBW) constructs, plate fixation (PF), and intramedullary screws (IMSF), have demonstrated high rates of reoperation and symptomatic implants. We present the omega plate technique, which utilizes a mini-fragment plate passed under the triceps tendon insertion, allowing maximal implant surface area contact with small, proximal olecranon fracture fragments. The mini-fragment plate is not placed on the dorsal subcutaneous border of the ulna, which allows it to capture medial and lateral fragments of cortical comminution and may contribute to less soft tissue irritation.

Evaluation of Intraoperative Fluoroscopic Techniques to Estimate Femoral Rotation: A Cadaveric Study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare three fluoroscopic methods for determining femoral rotation. METHODS: Native femoral version was measured by computed tomography in 20 intact femurs from 10 cadaveric specimens. Two Steinmann pins were placed into each left femur above and below a planned transverse osteotomy which was completed through the diaphysis. Four surgeons utilized the true lateral (TL), neck-horizontal angle (NH), and lesser trochanter profile (LTP) techniques to correct the injured femur's rotation using the intact right femur as reference, yielding 120 measurements. Accuracy was assessed by comparing the angle subtended by the two Steinmann pins before and after manipulation and comparing against version measurements of the right femur. RESULTS: Absolute mean rotational error in the fractured femur compared to its uninjured state was 6.0° (95% CI, 4.6-7.5), 6.6° (95% CI, 5.0-8.2), and 8.5° (95% CI, 6.5-10.6) for the TL, NH, and LTP techniques, respectively, without significant difference between techniques ( p = 0.100). Compared to the right femur, absolute mean rotational error was 6.6° (95% CI, 1.0-12.2), 6.4° (95% CI, 0.1-12.6), and 8.9° (95% CI, 0.8-17.0) for the TL, NH, and LTP techniques, respectively, without significant difference ( p = 0.180). Significantly more femurs were malrotated by >15° using the LTP method compared to the TL and NH methods (20.0% vs 2.5% and 5.0%, p = 0.030). Absolute mean error in estimating femoral rotation of the intact femur using the TL and NH methods compared to CT was 6.6° (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.1-8.2) and 4.4° (95% CI, 3.4-5.4), respectively, with significant difference between the two methods ( p = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: The true lateral (TL), neck-horizontal angle (NH), and the lesser trochanter profile (LTP) techniques performed similarly in correcting rotation of the fractured femur, but significantly more femurs were malrotated by >15° using the LTP technique. This supports preferential use of the TL or NH methods for determining femoral version intraoperatively.

Differential arterial and venous endothelial redox responses to oxidative stress.

OBJECTIVE: Oxidative stress is a central event linked with endothelial dysfunction and inflammation in several vascular pathologies, marked by over-production of ROS and concomitant decreases in antioxidants, for example GSH. Here, we distinguish endothelial oxidative stress regulation and associated functional disparities in the two main vascular conduits, (arteries and veins) following decreases in GSH. METHODS: MAECs and VCECs were used as models of arterial and venular endothelium, respectively, and BSO (0-100 µmol/L) was used to indirectly increase cellular oxidative stress. Inflammatory responses were measured using immune cell attachment and immunoblotting for endothelial cell adhesion molecule (ICAM-1, VCAM-1) expression, altered cell proliferation, and wound healing. RESULTS: MAECs and VCECs exhibited differential responses to oxidative stress produced by GSH depletion with VCECs exhibiting greater sensitivity to oxidative stress. Compared to MAECs, VCECs showed a significantly increased inflammatory profile and a decreased proliferative phenotype in response to decreases in GSH levels. CONCLUSIONS: Arterial and venous endothelial cells exhibit differential responses to oxidant stress, and decreases in GSH:GSSG are more exacerbated in venous endothelial cells. Specific pathogenesis in these vascular conduits, with respect to oxidant stress handling, warrants further study, especially considering surgical interventions such as Coronary artery bypass grafting that use both interchangeably.