Fixation or Revision for Periprosthetic Fractures: Epidemiology, New Trends, and Projections in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic fractures can be devastating complications after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The management of periprosthetic fractures is complex, spanning expertise in arthroplasty and trauma. The purpose of this study was to examine and project trends in the operative treatment of periprosthetic fractures in the United States. METHODS: A large, public and private payer database was queried to capture all International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) diagnosis codes for periprosthetic femoral and tibial fractures. Statistical models were created to assess trends in treatment for periprosthetic fractures and to predict future surgical rates. An alpha value of 0.05 was used to assess significance. A Bonferroni correction was applied where applicable to account for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: In this study, from 2016 to 2021, 121,298 patients underwent surgical treatment for periprosthetic fractures. There was a significant increase in the total number of periprosthetic fractures. The incidence of periprosthetic hip fractures rose by 38% and that for periprosthetic knee fractures rose by 73%. The number of periprosthetic fractures is predicted to rise 212% from 2016 to 2032. There was a relative increase in open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) compared with revision arthroplasty for both periprosthetic hip fractures and periprosthetic knee fractures. CONCLUSIONS: Periprosthetic fractures are anticipated to impose a substantial health-care burden in the coming decades. Periprosthetic knee fractures are predominantly treated with ORIF rather than revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA), whereas periprosthetic hip fractures are predominantly treated with revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) rather than ORIF. Both periprosthetic knee fractures and periprosthetic hip fractures demonstrated increasing trends in this study. The proportion of periprosthetic hip fractures treated with ORIF relative to revision THA has been increasing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Management of periprosthetic hip fractures: current status and prospects; experience of the traumatology and orthopedics department of Mohammed VI University Hospital, Marrakech.

INTRODUCTION: The increase in hip arthroplasties predicts a rise in periprosthetic fractures in Morocco, posing challenges for orthopedic surgeons. Therapeutic strategies vary considerably, highlighting the absence of a universally accepted treatment protocol. AIM: To analyze the management of per-prosthetic hip fractures, while addressing the challenges associated with them. METHODS: This was a retrospective study, conducted in the trauma-orthopedics department between December 2015 and November 2022. Nineteen patients who presented to the hospital with fractures around a hip prosthesis were included. RESULT: Nineteen periprosthetic fractures were observed. The majority of patients (68%) were women, with an average age of 68. The Vancouver classification showed that 52.6% of the fractures were type B1, and 21.1% type C, while the other fracture types were distributed differently. These fractures were mainly associated with diagnoses such as femoral neck fracture (63.2%) and coxarthrosis (31.6%). We observed variations in treatment recommendations and results between the different series analyzed. We noted discrepancies with certain series concerning fracture types and therapeutic choices. However, in our series, we achieved satisfactory results, with successful consolidation and the absence of complications in all patients. CONCLUSION: These results underline the importance of an individualized approach to fracture management, taking into account the specificities of each case.

Ipsilateral pubic ramus fracture during total hip arthroplasty is not rare: does it matter?

INTRODUCTION: Periprosthetic fractures in total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been well described and studied. However, there is a lack of reports on ipsilateral pubic ramus fractures during THA due to the rare occurrence of such fractures and ambiguity of symptoms. With the use of postoperative computed tomography (CT) examinations, we have identified that asymptomatic ipsilateral pubic ramus fractures occur frequently during THA. This study aims to evaluate the incidence, location, clinical outcomes, and risk factors of ipsilateral pubic ramus fractures during THA. METHODS: From May 2022 to March 2023, a single surgeon performed 203 THAs in 183 patients at a single institution. All patients underwent postoperative CT scans three days after THA. The patients with ipsilateral pubic ramus fractures were followed up for a minimum of six months. Basic demographics, osteoporosis, general conditions of the operations, and outcomes of THA were investigated in all patients. RESULTS: Twenty-two cases (10.8%) of ipsilateral pubic ramus fractures were identified on postoperative CT scans. All fractures were located near the origin of the superior or inferior pubic ramus. Five fractures were detected on simple postoperative radiographs. The fractures did not cause any further complications at a minimum of six-month postoperative follow-up. Univariate and multivariate analyses did not identify any risk factors associated with these fractures. CONCLUSIONS: Although the incidence of ipsilateral pubic ramus fractures during THA is high, treatment is not required as they do not cause any significant clinical symptoms or affect the prognosis of THA. However, the possibility of occurrence of these fractures must be explained to the patients before surgery.

Clinical differences between periprosthetic and native distal femur fractures: a comparative observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of periprosthetic distal femur fractures (PDFF) is increasing as the number of total knee replacements becomes more common. This study compared the demographics, fracture characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of periprosthetic versus native distal femur fractures (NDFF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients ≥ 18 who underwent surgical fixation of NDFF or PDFF from 2012 to 2020 at a level-1 trauma center. The main variables collected included demographics, AO/OTA fracture classification, fixation construct, concomitant fractures, polytrauma rates, bone density, and reduction quality. Primary outcomes were unexpected return to the operating room (UROR), hospital length of stay, and quality of reduction. T-tests, Fisher's exact tests, and multivariate analyses were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: 209 patients were identified, including 70 PDFF and 139 NDFF. PDFF patients were elderly females (81%) with isolated (80%) and comminuted (85%) 33 A.3 (71%) fractures. NDFF patients included 53% females, were commonly middle-aged, and displayed comminuted (92%) 33 C.2 fractures. 48% of NDFF patients had concomitant fractures. Intramedullary nailing was the primary fixation for both groups, followed by nail-plate combination (37%) for PDFF and lateral locking plates (21%) for NDFF. NDFF patients experienced significantly longer hospital stays, higher UROR rates, and worse quality of reduction (p < 0.05). PDFF patients had a significantly greater prevalence of low bone density (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: PDFF occur as isolated injuries with significant metaphyseal comminution in elderly females with low bone quality. NDFF commonly occurs in younger patients with less metaphyseal comminution and concomitant fractures. Intramedullary nailing was the most common treatment for both groups, although preference for nail-plate combination fixation is increasing. NDFF type 33 C fractures are at greater risk of UROR.

Patients with Osteoporosis Are at Higher Risk for Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures and Aseptic Loosening Following Total Hip Arthroplasty.

This report provides an updated analysis for patients with osteoporosis following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The comorbidities of alcohol abuse, chronic kidney disease, cerebrovascular disease, obesity, and rheumatoid arthritis continue to be significant risk factors for periprosthetic femur fracture (PPFFx) and aseptic loosening in the population with osteoporosis. Patients with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometric (DEXA) scans were at risk for PPFFx regardless of femoral fixation method, and patients with DEXA scans with cementless fixation were at risk of aseptic loosening after THA. The patient population with severe osteoporosis may have higher risks for aseptic loosening and PPFFx than previously recognized.

Osteosarcoma After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Case Report.

CASE: A 79-year-old woman presented with a periprosthetic fracture 8 years after a total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Radiographs demonstrated tibial implant loosening with severe osteolysis. A high-grade osteosarcoma around the prosthesis was diagnosed, and a supracondylar femoral amputation was performed. After 2 years, no complications have occurred. CONCLUSIONS: A malignant tumor around a TKA is extremely rare. Surgeons should remain vigilant with patients who present with rapidly progressive or very aggressive implant loosening with osteolysis. Owing to its complexity and potentially devastating prognosis, treatment should be guided by a specialist multidisciplinary team. Complex limb salvage procedures or amputation is usually required.

Traumatic Floating Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Case Report.

CASE: A 58-year-old woman with medical history of a left total hip arthroplasty performed by the direct anterior (DA) approach 2 years prior presented with left hip pain. She was found to have sustained a transverse Vancouver C periprosthetic femur fracture and an unstable periprosthetic pelvic fracture. CONCLUSIONS: This patient's case represents a previously not reported injury about a total hip arthroplasty-with disruption distal to the femoral implant and proximal to the acetabular implant, with the implant-to-bone interface unaffected. This case may guide future treatment of similar injuries.

What are the predisposing factors for periprosthetic fractures following total hip arthroplasty? - a National Inpatient Sample-based study.

INTRODUCTION: With a progressive rise in the number of total hip arthroplasties (THA) over the past decades, the proportion of patients sustaining peri-prosthetic fractures (PPF) has been substantially increasing. In this context, the need for clearly understanding the factors predisposing patients to PPF following THA and the impact of these adverse complications on the overall healthcare burden cannot be understated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based upon the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, the patients who underwent THA in the United States between 2016 and2019 (with ICD-10 CMP code) were identified. The patients were divided into 2 groups; group A - patients who sustained PPF and group B - those who did not. The information about the patients' demographic profile, medical comorbidities; and hospital admission (including length of stay and expenditure incurred) were analysed; and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Overall, 367,890 patients underwent THA, among whom 4,425 (1.2%) sustained PPF (group A). The remaining patients were classified under group B (363,465 patients). On the basis of multi-variate analysis (MVA), there was a significantly greater proportion of females, elderly patients, and emergent admissions (p < 0.001) in group A. The length of hospital stay, expenditure incurred and mortality were also significantly higher (p = 0.001) in group A. Based on MVA, Down's syndrome (odd's ratio 3.15, p = 0.01), H/O colostomy (odd's ratio 2.09, p = 0.008), liver cirrhosis (odd's ratio 2.01, p < 0.001), Parkinson's disease (odd's ratio 1.49, p = 0.004), morbid obesity (odd's ratio 1.44, p < 0.001), super obesity (odd's ratio 1.49, p = 0.03), and H/O CABG (coronary artery bypass graft; odd's ratio 1.21, p = 0.03) demonstrated significant association with PPF (group A). CONCLUSION: Patients with PPF require higher rates of emergent admission, longer hospital stay and greater admission-related expenditure. Female sex, advanced age, morbid or super obesity, and presence of medical comorbidities (such as Down's syndrome, cirrhosis, Parkinson's disease, previous colostomy, and previous CABG) significantly enhance the risk of PPF after THA. These medical conditions must be kept in clinicians' minds and close follow-up needs to be implemented in such situations so as to mitigate these complications.

Periprosthetic fractures are osteoporotic fractures: missed opportunities for osteoporosis diagnosis.

Joint replacement surgery is common in older adults, leading to increasing periprosthetic fracture (PPFx) occurrence. We reviewed all PPFx seen over a 4-year period at an academic hospital. Clinical osteoporosis could be diagnosed based on existing data in 104 (67%) at the time of PPFx. Periprosthetic fractures are generally osteoporosis-related. PURPOSE: Periprosthetic fractures (PPFx) cause morbidity, mortality, and cost. This study's purpose was to describe osteoporosis-related data available at the time of PPFx. METHODS: The electronic medical record (EMR) of PPFx patients seen over 4 years in a university orthopedic practice were reviewed. Demographic data and osteoporosis relevant parameters were collected. Prior DXA studies were reviewed, and L1 Hounsfield unit (HU) measurements were performed on CT scans obtained within 2 years before PPFx. Clinical osteoporosis was defined as prior diagnosis, prescribed osteoporosis treatment, T-score ≤ - 2.5, HU ≤ 100, or prior fracture. RESULTS: Records of 156 PPFx patients (115 F/41 M), mean (SD) age 75.4 (11.9), were reviewed. Almost all 153/156 (98%) of these fractures were femoral. Falls caused 139 (89%); 12 (8%) were spontaneous. Mean time post-arthroplasty was 7.9 (6.3) years. Prior fragility fracture(s) occurred in 72 (46%); 14 were PPFx. Osteoporosis was previously diagnosed in 45 (29%) and medications prescribed in 41 (26%). Prior to PPFx, DXA data were available in 62, mean (SD) lowest T-score was - 1.9 (0.9) and was ≤ - 2.5 in 19. CT data were available in 46; mean (SD) L1 HU was 79.0 (29.4) and was ≤ 100 in 35. Based on existing data, clinical osteoporosis could have been diagnosed in 104 (67%) at the time of PPFx. CONCLUSION: Periprosthetic fractures are osteoporosis-related. They occur in older adults, often female, and result from falls; BMD, when assessed, is low. Data available at the time of PPFx often allows osteoporosis diagnosis; this should prompt evaluation and pharmacologic treatment consideration.

Experience of an anatomic femoral stem in a UK orthopaedic centre beyond 20 years of follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: Increasing interest in the use of anatomical stems has developed as the prevalence of periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) continues to increase. The primary aim of this study was to determine the long-term survivorship and PPF rate of an anatomical femoral stem in a single UK centre. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2000 and 2002, 94 consecutive THAs were performed using the 170 mm Lubinus SP II anatomical femoral stem in our institution. Patient demographics, operative details and clinical outcomes were collected prospectively in an arthroplasty database. Patient records and national radiographic archives were reviewed finally at a mean of 21.5 years (SD 0.7) following surgery to identify occurrence of subsequent revision surgery, dislocation or periprosthetic fracture. RESULTS: Mean patient age at surgery was 65.8 years (SD 12.5, 34-88 years). There were 48 women (51%). Osteoarthritis was the operative indication in 88 patients (94%). Analysis of all-cause THA failure demonstrated a survivorship of 98.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 98.0-99.3%) at 10 years and 96.7% (94.5-98.9%) at 21 years. The 20-year stem survival for aseptic loosening was 100% with no cases of significant lysis found (lucent line > 2 mm) and no stems required revision. Patient demographics did not appear to influence risk of revision (p > 0.05). There were 2 revisions in total (2 for acetabular loosening with original stems retained). There were no PPFs identified at mean 21.5 year follow-up and 5 dislocations (5%). CONCLUSIONS: The Lubinus SP II 170 mm stem demonstrated excellent survivorship and negligible PPF rates over 20 years following primary THA.

Health status after periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures.

Aims: Periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures (PFFs) are a major complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Health status after PFF is not specifically investigated. The aim of this study is to evaluate the health status pattern over two years after sustaining a PFF. Methods: A cohort of patients with PFF after THA was derived from the Brabant Injury Outcomes Surveillance (BIOS) study. The BIOS study, a prospective, observational, multicentre follow-up cohort study, was conducted to obtain data by questionnaires pre-injury and at one week, and one, three, six, 12, and 24 months after trauma. Primary outcome measures were the EuroQol five-dimension three-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L), the Health Utility Index 2 (HUI2), and the Health Utility Index 3 (HUI3). Secondary outcome measures were general measurements such as duration of hospital stay and mortality. Results: A total of 70 patients with a PFF were included. EQ-5D utility scores were significantly lower on all timepoints except at six months' follow-up compared to pre-injury. EuroQol visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) scores at one month's follow-up were significantly lower compared to pre-injury. The percentage of reported problems at two years was higher for all dimensions except anxiety/depression when compared to pre-injury. The mean EQ-5D utility score was 0.26 higher in males compared to females (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 0.42; p = 0.003). The mean EQ-VAS score for males was 8.9 points higher when compared to females over all timepoints (95% CI 1.2 to 16.7; p = 0.027). Mortality was 10% after two years' follow-up. Conclusion: PFF patients are a frail population with substantial functional impairment at baseline. Post-injury, they have a significant and clinically relevant lower health status two years after trauma when compared to pre-injury. Health status improves the most between one and three months after injury. Two years after PFF, more patients experience problems in mobility, self-care, usual activities, and pain/discomfort than pre-injury.

Factors influencing periprosthetic bone mineral density in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Following total knee arthroplasty (TKA), there is a significant decline in periprosthetic bone mineral density (BMD), potentially resulting in complications such as prosthetic loosening, periprosthetic fracture, and influencing the postoperative recovery. The objective of this study was to summarize the factors influencing periprosthetic BMD in TKA from existing studies. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic search was performed in 4 databases: Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The last search was carried out on October 12, 2023. We used the keywords ''total knee arthroplasty'', ''bone mineral density'' and each of them combined with ''tibia'' and ''femur'' to identify all relevant articles reporting about potential impact factors influencing the periprosthetic BMD in patients after TKA. RESULTS: Out of 1391 articles, 22 published from 2001 to 2023 were included in this systematic review. Following eligibility screening, six significant categories affecting periprosthetic BMD were recognized: prosthesis type, design of stem, coating, body weight, cement, and peg distance. CONCLUSION: Mobile-bearing prostheses, modular polyethylene design, short stems, cruciform stems, avoidance of bone cement, higher body mass index, titanium nitride coating, and a smaller medial peg distance could potentially benefit periprosthetic BMD. Comprehensive consideration of diverse factors influencing periprosthetic BMD before surgery and collaboration with post-operative drug therapy are essential. TRIAL REGISTRY: The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42023472030.

Complications and Reinterventions of Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in a Korean Population: 14-Year Experience in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Background: There are few reports on the revision or reintervention of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) in South Korea. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the true incidence of complications and reintervention of RTSA and clinical and radiological outcomes based on our 14-year experience in RTSA in a Korean population. Methods: Between March 2008 and June 2022, 412 consecutive cases of RTSA were performed in 388 patients with an average age of 74.4 years at our institute. Excluding 23 patients lost to follow-up, 365 patients (373 shoulders including 8 bilateral cases) who underwent primary RTSA with more than 6 months of follow-up were enrolled in this study. We evaluated those who had complications or reintervention including revision RTSA for failed RTSA. Patient charts were reviewed, and clinical outcomes including clinical scores, complications, and reintervention and radiologic outcomes were evaluated at the last follow-up. Results: Among the 373 shoulders that underwent primary RTSA, complications were found in 50 patients (13.94%, 10 men and 40 women with a mean age of 75.9 ± 6.7 years [range, 51-87 years]). The causes of complications were as follows: 13 acromion, coracoid, or scapular spine fractures, 10 loosening (glenoid: 5, humeral stem: 5), 5 infections, 4 periprosthetic fractures, 2 instability, 2 neurologic complications, and 14 miscellaneous complications. Twenty patients (5.63%, 4 men and 16 women with a mean age of 74.2 ± 8.2 years [range, 51-87 years]) underwent reintervention. The interval to the first reintervention was 27.8 ± 23.1 months (range, 0.1-78 months). The causes of reintervention (20 cases) were 8 loosening (glenoid: 4, humeral stem: 4), 5 infections, 5 fractures, and 2 instability. Among them, 15 component revisions (4.02%) were performed. At the last follow-up, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, University of California at Los Angeles, and Simple Shoulder Test scores were improved from 25.4, 12.4, and 1.6 preoperatively to 40.4, 16.2, and 3.2, respectively. Forward flexion (48° to 87°), abduction (52° to 79°), external rotation (18° to 22°), and internal rotation (buttock to L2) were improved. Conclusions: After primary RTSA in a Korean population, the complication, reintervention, and revision rates were 13.94%, 5.63%, and 4.02%, respectively. Careful evaluation of the complications and adequate treatments should be performed.

Recurrent implant fractures in total hip arthroplasty: a yes-you-yan case report.

This case report describes a single patient with recurrent implant fractures of his left total hip replacement. According to our knowledge this is the first patient in literature with recurrent implant fractures. This is a rare phenomenon as reason for revision. Risk factors for implant failure of total hip replacement include a lack of proximal support, a distally well fixed stem with proximal debonding, malalignment of the stem and raised BMI.

Reoperation risk of periprosthetic fracture after primary total hip arthroplasty using a collared cementless or a taper-slip cemented stem.

Aims: The aim of this study was to determine both the incidence of, and the reoperation rate for, postoperative periprosthetic femoral fracture (POPFF) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) with either a collared cementless (CC) femoral component or a cemented polished taper-slip (PTS) femoral component. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of a consecutive series of 11,018 THAs over a ten-year period. All POPFFs were identified using regional radiograph archiving and electronic care systems. Results: A total of 11,018 THAs were implanted: 4,952 CC femoral components and 6,066 cemented PTS femoral components. Between groups, age, sex, and BMI did not differ. Overall, 91 patients (0.8%) sustained a POPFF. For all patients with a POPFF, 16.5% (15/91) were managed conservatively, 67.0% (61/91) underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), and 16.5% (15/91) underwent revision. The CC group had a lower POPFF rate compared to the PTS group (0.7% (36/4,952) vs 0.9% (55/6,066); p = 0.345). Fewer POPFFs in the CC group required surgery (0.4% (22/4,952) vs 0.9% (54/6,066); p = 0.005). Fewer POPFFs required surgery in males with a CC than males with a PTS (0.3% (7/2,121) vs 1.3% (36/2,674); p < 0.001). Conclusion: Male patients with a PTS femoral component were five times more likely to have a reoperation for POPFF. Female patients had the same incidence of reoperation with either component type. Of those having a reoperation, 80.3% (61/76) had an ORIF, which could greatly mask the size of this problem in many registries.

The characteristics and predictors of mortality in periprosthetic fractures around the knee.

Aims: Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) around the knee are challenging injuries. This study aims to describe the characteristics of knee PPFs and the impact of patient demographics, fracture types, and management modalities on in-hospital mortality. Methods: Using a multicentre study design, independent of registry data, we included adult patients sustaining a PPF around a knee arthroplasty between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2019. Univariate, then multivariable, logistic regression analyses were performed to study the impact of patient, fracture, and treatment on mortality. Results: Out of a total of 1,667 patients in the PPF study database, 420 patients were included. The in-hospital mortality rate was 6.4%. Multivariable analyses suggested that American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, history of peripheral vascular disease (PVD), history of rheumatic disease, fracture around a loose implant, and cerebrovascular accident (CVA) during hospital stay were each independently associated with mortality. Each point increase in ASA grade independently correlated with a four-fold greater mortality risk (odds ratio (OR) 4.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 14.06); p = 0.026). Patients with PVD have a nine-fold increase in mortality risk (OR 9.1 (95% CI 1.25 to 66.47); p = 0.030) and patients with rheumatic disease have a 6.8-fold increase in mortality risk (OR 6.8 (95% CI 1.32 to 34.68); p = 0.022). Patients with a fracture around a loose implant (Unified Classification System (UCS) B2) have a 20-fold increase in mortality, compared to UCS A1 (OR 20.9 (95% CI 1.61 to 271.38); p = 0.020). Mode of management was not a significant predictor of mortality. Patients managed with revision arthroplasty had a significantly longer length of stay (median 16 days; p = 0.029) and higher rates of return to theatre, compared to patients treated nonoperatively or with fixation. Conclusion: The mortality rate in PPFs around the knee is similar to that for native distal femur and neck of femur fragility fractures. Patients with certain modifiable risk factors should be optimized. A national PPF database and standardized management guidelines are currently required to understand these complex injuries and to improve patient outcomes.

Periprosthetic fracture following arthroplasty for femoral neck fracture: is a cemented stem protective?

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFF) carry significant morbidity following arthroplasty for femoral neck fracture (FNF). This study assessed fracture complications following arthroplasty for FNF and the effect of cement fixation of the femoral component on intraoperative and post-operative PFF. METHODS: Between February 2014 and September 2021, 740 patients with a FNF who underwent arthroplasty were analyzed for demographics, surgical management, use of cement for fixation of the femoral component, and subsequent PFF. Variables were compared with Mann-Whitney or Chi-square as appropriate. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess independent risk factors associated with intraoperative or post-operative PFF. RESULTS: There were 163 THAs (41% cemented) and 577 HAs (95% cemented). There were 28 PFFs (3.8%): 18 post-operative and 10 intraoperative. Fewer post-operative PFFs occurred with cemented stems (1.63% vs. 6.30%, p = 0.002). Mean time from surgery to presentation with post-operative PFF was 14 months (0-45 months). Mean follow-up time was 10.3 months (range: 0-75.7 months). In multivariate regression, use of cement and THA was independently associated with decreased post-operative PFF (cement: OR 0.112, 95% CI 0.036-0.352, p < 0.001 and THA: OR 0.249, 95% CI 0.064-0.961, p = 0.044). More intraoperative fractures occurred during THA (3.68% vs. 0.69%, p = 0.004) and non-cemented procedures (5.51% vs. 0.49%, p < 0.001). In multivariate regression, use of cement was protective against intraoperative fracture (OR 0.100, CI 0.017-0.571, p = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a FNF treated with arthroplasty, cementing the femoral component is associated with a lower risk of intraoperative and post-operative PFF. Choice of procedure may be based on patient factors and surgeon preference.

A comparison of cemented femoral fixation via anterior versus posterior approach total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of 60,739 total hip arthroplasties.

BACKGROUND: Anterior approach total hip arthroplasty (THA) decreases the rate of dislocation but increases femoral-sided complications in the way of periprosthetic fractures and component loosening. A cemented prosthesis may reduce femoral-sided complications and improve the risk:benefit profile of anterior approach THA. METHODS: Data from the Australian National Joint Replacement Registry were analysed for patients undergoing primary THA via the anterior or posterior approach using a cemented polished femoral stem from January 2015 to December 2021. The primary outcome measure was the cumulative percent revision (CPR) for all causes and CPR for femoral component loosening and fracture. The CPR for the primary outcome measures were compared between the anterior and posterior approach and adjusted for age, sex, ASA score, BMI and femoral head size. RESULTS: The study included 60,739 THAs with cemented stems (10,742 anterior, 49,997 posterior). The rate of revision of the anterior versus the posterior approach did not significantly differ (HR 0.87 (95% CI, 0.74-1.03), p = 0.100). Anterior approach THA had a significantly higher rate of revision for femoral component loosening (HR 5.06 [95% CI, 3.08-8.30], p < 0.001); and a decreased rate of revision for infection (HR 0.59 [95% CI, 0.43-0.81], p = 0.001) and dislocation/instability (HR 0-3 months 0.48 [95% CI, 0.27-0.83], p = 0.008; HR >3 months 0.30 [95% CI, 0.15-0.61], p < 0.001). There was no difference in the rate of revision surgery for fracture between the 2 approaches (HR 1.01 [95% CI, 0.71-1.43]), p = 0.975). CONCLUSIONS: There is no significant difference in overall revision rates with cemented femoral fixation performed with an anterior or posterior approach. Cemented fixation performed with the anterior approach partly mitigates femoral complications with no difference in the revision rate for fracture but an increased rate of femoral component loosening.