Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Typ-2-Diabetes und Adipositas Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
International Orthopaedics
Erschienen in: International Orthopaedics 4/2015

01.04.2015 | Original Paper

Primary cementless hip arthroplasty as a potential risk factor for non-union after long-stem revision arthroplasty in periprosthetic femoral fractures

verfasst von: Sandra Boesmueller, Marc Michel, Marcus Hofbauer, Patrick Platzer

Erschienen in: International Orthopaedics | Ausgabe 4/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

In case of stem loosening in periprosthetic femoral fractures (PPFF), revision arthroplasty should be performed. The first hypothesis of this study was that advanced patient age and female gender shows higher non-union rates. The second hypothesis was that primary cementless arthroplasty is associated with a higher non-union rate compared to cemented primary hip arthroplasty.

Methods

All PPFF occurring between January 2000 and June 2010 treated by revision arthroplasty were included. Multiple regression analysis was performed to identify independent variables leading to fracture non-union.

Results

Eighty one patients (78 % female) met the inclusion criteria. In 20/81 patients (24.7 %) no adequate fracture healing could be determined on radiographs 12 months after revision surgery. Although age and female gender showed a positive correlation with bony non-union after PPFF as expected, the p-values were not statistically significant. Multiple regression analysis revealed primary cementless prosthesis (p = 0.001) to be the only independent variable associated with non-union.

Conclusion

Non-cemented primary prosthesis might be a negative predicting factor for the development of non-union after long-stem revision arthroplasty in PPFF. We therefore recommend the thorough debridement of pannus tissue thus inducing bone healing before the implantation of revision prostheses.
Literatur
1.
Berry DJ (1999) Epidemiology: hip and knee. Orthop Clin N Am 30:183–190CrossRef
2.
Mont MA, Maar DC, Krackow KA, Hungerford DS (1992) Hoop-stress fractures of the proximal femur during hip arthroplasty. Management and results in 19 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br Vol 74:257–260
3.
4.
Meek RMD, Norwood T, Smith R, Brenkel IJ, Howie CR (2011) The risk of peri-prosthetic fracture after primary and revision total hip and knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:96–101CrossRefPubMed
5.
Foster AP, Thompson NW, Wong J, Charlwood AP (2005) Periprosthetic femoral fractures–a comparison between cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasties. Injury 36:424–429CrossRefPubMed
6.
Lindahl H, Malchau H, Herberts P, Garellick G (2005) Periprosthetic femoral fractures classification and demographics of 1049 periprosthetic femoral fractures from the Swedish National Hip Arthroplasty Register. J Arthroplasty 20:857–865CrossRefPubMed
7.
Tsiridis E, Haddad FS, Gie GA (2003) The management of periprosthetic femoral fractures around hip replacements. Injury 34:95–105CrossRefPubMed
8.
Beals RK, Tower SS (1996) Periprosthetic fractures of the femur. An analysis of 93 fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 327:238–246
9.
Lindahl H, Malchau H, Odén A, Garellick G (2006) Risk factors for failure after treatment of a periprosthetic fracture of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br Vol 88:26–30CrossRef
10.
Zuurmond RG, van Wijhe W, van Raay JJAM, Bulstra SK (2010) High incidence of complications and poor clinical outcome in the operative treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures: an analysis of 71 cases. Injury 41:629–633CrossRefPubMed
11.
O’Shea K, Quinlan JF, Kutty S, Mulcahy D, Brady OH (2005) The use of uncemented extensively porous-coated femoral components in the management of Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:1617–1621CrossRefPubMed
12.
Holley K, Zelken J, Padgett D, Chimento G, Yun A, Buly R (2007) Periprosthetic fractures of the femur after hip arthroplasty: an analysis of 99 patients. HSS J 3:190–197CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
13.
Duncan CP, Masri BA (1995) Fractures of the femur after hip replacement. Instr Course Lect 44:293–304PubMed
14.
15.
Perren SM, Fernandez Dell’Oca A, Lenz M, Windolf M (2011) Cerclage, evolution and potential of a Cinderella technology. An overview with reference to periprosthetic fractures. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech 78(3):190–199PubMed
16.
Klein GR, Parvizi J, Rapuri V, Wolf CF, Hozack WJ, Sharkey PF, Purtill JJ (2005) Proximal femoral replacement for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:1777–1781CrossRef
17.
Langenhan R, Trobisch P, Ricart P, Probst A (2012) Aggressive surgical treatment of periprosthetic femur fractures can reduce mortality: comparison of open reduction and internal fixation versus a modular prosthesis nail. J Orthop Trauma 26:80–85CrossRefPubMed
18.
Lindahl H, Garellick G, Regnér H, Herberts P, Malchau H (2006) Three hundred and twenty-one periprosthetic femoral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:1215–1222CrossRef
19.
Mukundan C, Rayan F, Kheir E, Macdonald D (2010) Management of late periprosthetic femur fractures: a retrospective cohort of 72 patients. Int Orthop 34:485–489CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
20.
Probst A, Schneider T, Hankemeier S, Brug E (2003) The prosthesis nail — a new stable fixation device for periprosthetic fractures and critical fractures of the proximal femur. Unfallchirurg 106:722–731CrossRefPubMed
21.
Kessler SB, Hallfeldt KK, Perren SM, Schweiberer L (1986) The effects of reaming and intramedullary nailing on fracture healing. Clin Orthop Relat Res 212:18–25PubMed
22.
Webb LX, Winquist RA, Hansen ST (1986) Intramedullary nailing and reaming for delayed union or nonunion of the femoral shaft. A report of 105 consecutive cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res 212:133–141PubMed
23.
Society COT (2003) Nonunion following intramedullary nailing of the femur with and without reaming. Results of a multicenter randomized clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A(11):2093–2096
24.
Duan X, Li T, Mohammed AQ, Xiang Z (2011) Reamed intramedullary nailing versus unreamed intramedullary nailing for shaft fracture of femur: a systematic literature review. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 131(10):1445–1452. doi:10.​1007/​s00402-011-1311-8 CrossRefPubMed
25.
Forster MC, Aster AS, Ahmed S (2005) Reaming during anterograde femoral nailing: is it worth it? Injury 36(3):445–449, ReviewCrossRefPubMed
26.
Bong MR, Kummer FJ, Koval KJ, Egol KA (2007) Intramedullary nailing of the lower extremity: biomechanics and biology. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 15(2):97–106, ReviewPubMed
27.
Fitzgerald RH, Brindley GW, Kavanagh BF (1988) The uncemented total hip arthroplasty. Intraoperative femoral fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 235:61–66
28.
Schwartz JT, Mayer JG, Engh CA (1989) Femoral fracture during non-cemented total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 71:1135–1142
29.
Laurer HL, Wutzler S, Possner S, Geiger EV, El Saman A, Marzi I, Frank J (2011) Outcome after operative treatment of Vancouver type B1 and C periprosthetic femoral fractures: open reduction and internal fixation versus revision arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 131:983–989CrossRefPubMed
30.
Müller M, Kääb M, Tohtz S, Haas NP, Perka C (2009) Periprosthetic femoral fractures: outcome after treatment with LISS internal fixation or stem replacement in 36 patients. Acta Orthop Belg 75:776–783PubMed
31.
Pavlou G, Panteliadis P, Macdonald D, Timperley JA, Gie G, Bancroft G, Tsiridis E (2011) A review of 202 periprosthetic fractures—stem revision and allograft improves outcome for type B fractures. Hip Int 21:21–29CrossRefPubMed
32.
Rayan F, Konan S, Haddad FS (2010) Uncemented revision hip arthroplasty in B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures—A prospective analysis. Hip Int 20:38–42PubMed
33.
Fink B, Grossmann A, Singer J (2012) Hip revision arthroplasty in periprosthetic fractures of Vancouver type B2 and B3. J Orthop Trauma 26:206–211CrossRefPubMed
34.
35.
van Wunnik BPW, Weijers PHE, van Helden SH, Brink PRG, Poeze M (2011) Osteoporosis is not a risk factor for the development of nonunion: A cohort nested case-control study. Injury 42:1491–1494CrossRefPubMed
36.
Pressmar J, Macholz F, Merkert W, Gebhard F, Liener UC (2010) Results and complications in the treatment of periprosthetic femur fractures with a locked plate system. Unfallchirurg 113:195–202CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Primary cementless hip arthroplasty as a potential risk factor for non-union after long-stem revision arthroplasty in periprosthetic femoral fractures
verfasst von
Sandra Boesmueller
Marc Michel
Marcus Hofbauer
Patrick Platzer
Publikationsdatum
01.04.2015
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
International Orthopaedics / Ausgabe 4/2015
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2489-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2015

International Orthopaedics 4/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Original Paper

The influence of the medial meniscus in different conditions on anterior tibial translation in the anterior cruciate deficient knee

Original Paper

Association of TGFB1 29C/T and IL6 -572G/C polymorphisms with developmental hip dysplasia: a case–control study in adults with severe osteoarthritis

Original Paper

Bone morphogenetic protein-7 enhances bone-tendon integration in a murine in vitro co-culture model

Original Paper

Consensus for physiotherapy for shoulder pain

Book Review

Ashok Johari, Keith D.K. Luk, James P. Waddell (eds): Current progress in orthopedics

Original Paper

Long, titanium, cemented stems decreased late periprosthetic fractures and revisions in patients with severe bone loss and previous revision

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen. 
» Jetzt entdecken

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

TEP mit Roboterhilfe führt nicht zu größerer Zufriedenheit

15.05.2024 Knie-TEP Nachrichten

Der Einsatz von Operationsrobotern für den Einbau von Totalendoprothesen des Kniegelenks hat die Präzision der Eingriffe erhöht. Für die postoperative Zufriedenheit der Patienten scheint das aber unerheblich zu sein, wie eine Studie zeigt.

Lever-Sign-Test hilft beim Verdacht auf Kreuzbandriss

15.05.2024 Vordere Kreuzbandruptur Nachrichten

Mit dem Hebelzeichen-Test lässt sich offenbar recht zuverlässig feststellen, ob ein vorderes Kreuzband gerissen ist. In einer Metaanalyse war die Vorhersagekraft vor allem bei positivem Testergebnis hoch.

Ein Drittel der jungen Ärztinnen und Ärzte erwägt abzuwandern

07.05.2024 Klinik aktuell Nachrichten

Extreme Arbeitsverdichtung und kaum Supervision: Dr. Andrea Martini, Sprecherin des Bündnisses Junge Ärztinnen und Ärzte (BJÄ) über den Frust des ärztlichen Nachwuchses und die Vorteile des Rucksack-Modells.

Aquatherapie bei Fibromyalgie wirksamer als Trockenübungen

03.05.2024 Fibromyalgiesyndrom Nachrichten

Bewegungs-, Dehnungs- und Entspannungsübungen im Wasser lindern die Beschwerden von Patientinnen mit Fibromyalgie besser als das Üben auf trockenem Land. Das geht aus einer spanisch-brasilianischen Vergleichsstudie hervor.

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise