Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association (대한정형외과학회지)

Korean Orthopaedic Association (대한정형외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Decision-Making and Principle of Management in Periprosthetic Femoral Fracture after Total Hip Arthroplasty

고관절 치환술 후 삽입물의 안정성 판단과 대퇴 삽입물 주위 골절의 치료 원칙

  • Kim, Beom-Soo (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Keimyung University Dongsan Hospital, Keimyung University School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Kyung-Jae (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Keimyung University Dongsan Hospital, Keimyung University School of Medicine) ;
  • Min, Byung-Woo (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Keimyung University Dongsan Hospital, Keimyung University School of Medicine)
  • 김범수 (계명대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 이경재 (계명대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 민병우 (계명대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실)
  • Received : 2020.08.31
  • Accepted : 2020.10.19
  • Published : 2021.06.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Periprosthetic femoral fractures remain as one of the most challenging complications following total hip arthroplasty. A thorough clinical and radiographic evaluation, precise classification, and understanding of modern management principles are essential to obtain optimal results for these fractures. The Vancouver classification system is a simple, effective, and reproducible method for the planning treatments of these injuries. The fractures associated with a stable femoral stem can be treated effectively with osteosynthesis, but periprosthetic femoral fractures associated with a loose stem require revision arthroplasty. This paper describes the principle of the treatment of patients with periprosthetic femoral fractures and how to assess the stability of the femoral stem.

대퇴 삽입물 주위 골절은 고관절 치환술 후 발생하는 가장 치료하기 어려운 합병증 중 하나이며, 만족스러운 치료 결과를 얻으려면 면밀한 임상 및 방사선 사진 평가, 정확한 분류 및 치료 원칙에 대한 이해가 필수적이다. Vancouver 분류 시스템은 이러한 삽입물 주위 골절의 치료를 계획하기 위한 간단하고 효과적인 방법이다. 대퇴 스템이 안정된 골절은 견고한 내고정으로 효과적으로 치료할 수 있지만 대퇴 스템 해리가 동반된 경우 삽입물 주위 대퇴 골절은 재치환술이 필요하다. 고관절 치환술 후 발생할 수 있는 삽입물 주위 대퇴 골절 환자의 치료 원리와 대퇴 스템의 안정성을 평가하는 방법에 대해 설명하고자 한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Bates BD, Walmsley DW, Vicente MR, et al. An international, cross-sectional survey of the management of Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures around total hip arthroplasties. Injury. 2018;49:364-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2017.10.034
  2. Abdel MP, Lewallen DG, Berry DJ. Periprosthetic femur fractures treated with modular fluted, tapered stems. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472:599-603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-2936-4
  3. Misur PN, Duncan CP, Masri BA. The treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures after total hip arthroplasty: a critical analysis review. JBJS Rev. 2014;2:01874474-201408000-00004.
  4. Capone A, Congia S, Civinini R, Marongiu G. Periprosthetic fractures: epidemiology and current treatment. Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab. 2017;14:189-96. https://doi.org/10.11138/ccmbm/2017.14.1.189
  5. Bhattacharyya T, Chang D, Meigs JB, Estok DM 2nd, Malchau H. Mortality after periprosthetic fracture of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:2658-62. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.01538
  6. Lindahl H, Garellick G, Regner H, Herberts P, Malchau H. Three hundred and twenty-one periprosthetic femoral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:1215-22. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200606000-00007
  7. The Korean Hip Society. Textbook of the hip. 2nd ed. Seoul: Koonja Publishing; 2019. 668-79.
  8. Graham SM, Moazen M, Leonidou A, Tsiridis E. Locking plate fixation for Vancouver B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures: a critical analysis of 135 cases. J Orthop Sci. 2013;18:426-36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-013-0359-4
  9. Stoffel K, Sommer C, Kalampoki V, Blumenthal A, Joeris A. The influence of the operation technique and implant used in the treatment of periprosthetic hip and interprosthetic femur fractures: a systematic literature review of 1571 cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016;136:553-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-016-2407-y
  10. Froberg L, Troelsen A, Brix M. Periprosthetic Vancouver type B1 and C fractures treated by locking-plate osteosynthesis: fracture union and reoperations in 60 consecutive fractures. Acta Orthop. 2012;83:648-52. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2012.747925
  11. Carli AV, Negus JJ, Haddad FS. Periprosthetic femoral fractures and trying to avoid them: what is the contribution of femoral component design to the increased risk of periprosthetic femoral fracture? Bone Joint J. 2017;99(1 Supple A):50-9. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.99B1.BJJ-2016-0220.R1
  12. Hwang KT, Kim YH. Treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip arthroplasty. J Korean Fract Soc. 2011;24:121-30. https://doi.org/10.12671/jkfs.2011.24.1.121
  13. Lindahl H, Malchau H, Oden A, Garellick G. Risk factors for failure after treatment of a periprosthetic fracture of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:26-30.
  14. Brady OH, Garbuz DS, Masri BA, Duncan CP. Classification of the hip. Orthop Clin North Am. 1999;30:215-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0030-5898(05)70076-6
  15. Duncan CP, Masri BA. Fractures of the femur after hip replacement. Instr Course Lect. 1995;44:293-304.
  16. Naqvi GA, Baig SA, Awan N. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability and validity of the Vancouver classification system of periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27:1047-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2011.11.021
  17. Shah RP, Plummer DR, Moric M, Sporer SM, Levine BR, Della Valle CJ. Diagnosing infection in the setting of periprosthetic fractures. J Arthroplasty. 2016;31(9 Suppl):140-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2015.08.045
  18. Cahir JG, Toms AP, Marshall TJ, Wimhurst J, Nolan J. CT and MRI of hip arthroplasty. Clin Radiol. 2007;62:1163-71; discussion 1172-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2007.04.018
  19. Roth TD, Maertz NA, Parr JA, Buckwalter KA, Choplin RH. CT of the hip prosthesis: appearance of components, fixation, and complications. Radiographics. 2012;32:1089-107. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.324115183
  20. Khanuja HS, Vakil JJ, Goddard MS, Mont MA. Cementless femoral fixation in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:500-9. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.J.00774
  21. Pike J, Davidson D, Garbuz D, Duncan CP, O'Brien PJ, Masri BA. Principles of treatment for periprosthetic femoral shaft fractures around well-fixed total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009;17:677-88. https://doi.org/10.5435/00124635-200911000-00002
  22. Gromov K, Bersang A, Nielsen CS, Kallemose T, Husted H, Troelsen A. Risk factors for post-operative periprosthetic fractures following primary total hip arthroplasty with a proximally coated double-tapered cementless femoral component. Bone Joint J. 2017;99:451-7. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.99B4.BJJ-2016-0266.R2
  23. Min BW, Cho CH, Son ES, Lee KJ, Lee SW, Min KK. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis with locking compression plate in patients with Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures. Injury. 2018;49:1336-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2018.05.020
  24. Peters CL, Bachus KN, Davitt JS. Fixation of periprosthetic femur fractures: a biomechanical analysis comparing cortical strut allograft plates and conventional metal plates. Orthopedics. 2003;26:695-9. https://doi.org/10.3928/0147-7447-20030701-13
  25. Rollo G, Bonura EM, Huri G, et al. Standard plating vs. cortical strut and plating for periprosthetic knee fractures: a multicentre experience. Med Glas (Zenica). 2020;17:170-7.
  26. Hsieh PH, Chang YH, Lee PC, Shih CH. Periprosthetic fractures of the greater trochanter through osteolytic cysts with uncemented MicroStructured Omnifit prosthesis: retrospective analyses pf 23 fractures in 887 hips after 5-14 years. Acta Orthop. 2005;76:538-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453670510041538
  27. Wang JW, Chen LK, Chen CE. Surgical treatment of fractures of the greater trochanter associated with osteolytic lesions. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88 Suppl 1 Pt 2:250-8. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200609001-00009
  28. Whiteside LA. Surgical technique: transfer of the anterior portion of the gluteus maximus muscle for abductor deficiency of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:503-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-1975-y
  29. Sen R, Prasad P, Kumar S, Nagi O. Periprosthetic femoral fractures around well fixed implants: a simple method of fixation using LC-DCP with trochanteric purchase. Acta Orthop Belg. 2007;73:200-6.
  30. Ricci WM, Bolhofner BR, Loftus T, Cox C, Mitchell S, Borrelli J Jr. Indirect reduction and plate fixation, without grafting, for periprosthetic femoral shaft fractures about a stable intramedullary implant. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:2240-5.
  31. Abhaykumar S, Elliott DS. Percutaneous plate fixation for periprosthetic femoral fractures--a preliminary report. Injury. 2000;31:627-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-1383(00)00053-X
  32. Chakravarthy J, Bansal R, Cooper J. Locking plate osteosynthesis for Vancouver Type B1 and Type C periprosthetic fractures of femur: a report on 12 patients. Injury. 2007;38:725-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2007.02.038
  33. Yeo I, Rhyu KH, Kim SM, Park YS, Lim SJ. High union rates of locking compression plating with cortical strut allograft for type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures. Int Orthop. 2016;40:2365-71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-3107-x
  34. Kim YH, Mansukhani SA, Kim JS, Park JW. Use of locking plate and strut onlay allografts for periprosthetic fracture around well-fixed femoral components. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32:166-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.05.064
  35. Muller FJ, Galler M, Fuchtmeier B. Clinical and radiological results of patients treated with orthogonal double plating for periprosthetic femoral fractures. Int Orthop. 2014;38:2469-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2464-1
  36. Corten K, Macdonald SJ, McCalden RW, Bourne RB, Naudie DD. Results of cemented femoral revisions for periprosthetic femoral fractures in the elderly. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27:220-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2011.03.050
  37. Munro JT, Garbuz DS, Masri BA, Duncan CP. Tapered fluted titanium stems in the management of Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472:590-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-3087-3