[Minimally Invasive Treatment of Geriatric and Osteoporotic Femur Fractures with Polyaxial Locking Implants (NCB-DF®)]

Overview

Journal Unfallchirurg

Date 2010 Nov 18

PMID 21082161

Citations 7

Authors

B F El-Zayat

R Zettl

T Efe

A Kruger

F Eisenberg

S Ruchholtz

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Periprosthetic femur fractures in elderly patients are a challenging surgical procedure. The aim of this study was a prospective evaluation of minimally invasive implantation of non-contact bridging (NCB-DF®) plates.

Patients And Methods: A total of 30 osteosynthesis procedures in 29 patients (average age 76 years and mean ASA 2.9) with complex femur fractures were registered, 19 fractures were periprosthetic and osteoporosis was present in 17 bones. In 25 patients a minimally invasive percutaneous procedure was performed using a standardized technique. An x-ray examination and clinical follow-up were performed after 6, 12 and 24 weeks.

Results: The early complications (14% in total) included 1 plate breakage after 16 weeks as well as 3 minor revisions for screw length correction. The x-ray follow-up after 24 weeks showed a secondary extension deficit of 10° and 15° in the knee joint in 2 patients, respectively.

Conclusion: The NCB-DF® implantation using a standardized minimally invasive technique in periprosthetic femur fractures is a safe alternative in elderly patients. In this very sensitive population the early revision rate within the first 24 weeks is noticeable lower compared to similar procedures.

Citing Articles

More than a reposition tool: additional wire cerclage leads to increased load to failure in plate osteosynthesis for supracondylar femoral shaft fractures.

Bliemel C, Anrich D, Knauf T, Oberkircher L, Eschbach D, Klasan A Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2020; 141(7):1197-1205.

PMID: 32856181 PMC: 8215035. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-020-03586-1.

Mono- versus polyaxial locking plates in distal femur fractures - a biomechanical comparison of the Non-Contact-Bridging- (NCB) and the PERILOC-plate.

El-Zayat B, Efe T, Ruchholtz S, Khatib S, Timmesfeld N, Kruger A BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014; 15:369.

PMID: 25373872 PMC: 4232626. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-369.

Periprosthetic femoral fracture - an interdisciplinary challenge.

Hagel A, Siekmann H, Delank K Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2014; 111(39):658-64.

PMID: 25323023 PMC: 4200415. DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2014.0658.

Mid term results of distal femoral fractures treated with a polyaxial locking plate: a multi-center study.

Erhardt J, Vincenti M, Pressmar J, Kuelling F, Spross C, Gebhard F Open Orthop J. 2014; 8:34-40.

PMID: 24627731 PMC: 3952208. DOI: 10.2174/1874325001408010034.

Mono- versus polyaxial locking plates in distal femur fractures: a prospective randomized multicentre clinical trial.

Hanschen M, Aschenbrenner I, Fehske K, Kirchhoff S, Keil L, Holzapfel B Int Orthop. 2013; 38(4):857-63.

PMID: 24326361 PMC: 3971278. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-013-2210-0.

References

Janzing H, Vaes F, Van Damme G, Stockman B, Broos P . Treatment of distal femoral fractures in the elderly. Results with the retrograde intramedullary supracondylar nail. Unfallchirurgie. 1998; 24(2):55-9. DOI: 10.1007/BF02044354. View

Kelley . Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 1994; 2(3):164-172. DOI: 10.5435/00124635-199405000-00005. View

Erhardt J, Grob K, Roderer G, Hoffmann A, Forster T, Kuster M . Treatment of periprosthetic femur fractures with the non-contact bridging plate: a new angular stable implant. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2007; 128(4):409-16. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-007-0396-6. View

Rorabeck C, Taylor J . Classification of periprosthetic fractures complicating total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 1999; 30(2):209-14. DOI: 10.1016/s0030-5898(05)70075-4. View

Mont M, Maar D . Fractures of the ipsilateral femur after hip arthroplasty. A statistical analysis of outcome based on 487 patients. J Arthroplasty. 1994; 9(5):511-9. DOI: 10.1016/0883-5403(94)90098-1. View

Wilkens K, Curtiss S, Lee M . Polyaxial locking plate fixation in distal femur fractures: a biomechanical comparison. J Orthop Trauma. 2008; 22(9):624-8. DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e31818896b3. View

Ricci W, Loftus T, Cox C, Borrelli J . Locked plates combined with minimally invasive insertion technique for the treatment of periprosthetic supracondylar femur fractures above a total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Trauma. 2006; 20(3):190-6. DOI: 10.1097/00005131-200603000-00005. View

Chen F, Mont M, Bachner R . Management of ipsilateral supracondylar femur fractures following total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1994; 9(5):521-6. DOI: 10.1016/0883-5403(94)90099-x. View

Krettek C, Schulte-Eistrup S, Schandelmaier P, Rudolf J, Tscherne H . [Osteosynthesis of femur shaft fractures with the unreamed AO-femur nail. Surgical technique and initial clinical results standard lock fixation]. Unfallchirurg. 1994; 97(11):549-67. View

10.

Beals R, TOWER S . Periprosthetic fractures of the femur. An analysis of 93 fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996; (327):238-46. DOI: 10.1097/00003086-199606000-00029. View

11.

Berry D . Epidemiology: hip and knee. Orthop Clin North Am. 1999; 30(2):183-90. DOI: 10.1016/s0030-5898(05)70073-0. View

12.

Wick M, Muller E, Kutscha-Lissberg F, Hopf F, Muhr G . [Periprosthetic supracondylar femoral fractures: LISS or retrograde intramedullary nailing? Problems with the use of minimally invasive technique]. Unfallchirurg. 2004; 107(3):181-8. DOI: 10.1007/s00113-003-0723-5. View

13.

Su E, DeWal H, Di Cesare P . Periprosthetic femoral fractures above total knee replacements. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2004; 12(1):12-20. DOI: 10.5435/00124635-200401000-00003. View

14.

Jennett B, Bond M . Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage. Lancet. 1975; 1(7905):480-4. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(75)92830-5. View

15.

Kaab M, Stockle U, Schutz M, Stefansky J, Perka C, Haas N . Stabilisation of periprosthetic fractures with angular stable internal fixation: a report of 13 cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2005; 126(2):105-10. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-005-0075-4. View

16.

Pressmar J, Macholz F, Merkert W, Gebhard F, Liener U . [Results and complications in the treatment of periprosthetic femur fractures with a locked plate system]. Unfallchirurg. 2009; 113(3):195-202. DOI: 10.1007/s00113-009-1665-3. View

17.

Ostrum R, Agarwal A, Lakatos R, Poka A . Prospective comparison of retrograde and antegrade femoral intramedullary nailing. J Orthop Trauma. 2000; 14(7):496-501. DOI: 10.1097/00005131-200009000-00006. View

18.

Mittlmeier T, Stockle U, Perka C, Schaser K . [Periprosthetic fractures after total knee joint arthroplasty]. Unfallchirurg. 2005; 108(6):481-95. DOI: 10.1007/s00113-005-0955-7. View

19.

TOWER S, Beals R . Fractures of the femur after hip replacement: the Oregon experience. Orthop Clin North Am. 1999; 30(2):235-47. DOI: 10.1016/s0030-5898(05)70078-x. View

20.

Johansson J, McBroom R, BARRINGTON T, Hunter G . Fracture of the ipsilateral femur in patients wih total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1981; 63(9):1435-42. View