» Articles » PMID: 23430720

Increase of Cortical Bone After a Cementless Long Stem in Periprosthetic Fractures

Overview
Publisher Wolters Kluwer
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2013 Feb 23
PMID 23430720
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Healing and functional recovery have been reported using an extensively porous-coated stem in Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures; however, loss of cortical bone has been observed when using these stems in revision surgery for aseptic loosening. However, it is unclear whether this bone loss influences subsequent loosening.

Question/purposes: We analyze the healing fracture rate and whether the radiographic changes observed around and extensively porous-coated stem used for periprosthetic fractures affect function or loosening.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 35 patients with periprosthetic fractures (20 Vancouver B2 and 15 Vancouver B3). Patients' mean age at surgery was 80 years (range, 51-86 years). No cortical struts were used in this series. We evaluated radiographs for signs of loosening or subsidence. The cortical index and the femoral cortical width were measured at different levels on the immediate pre- and postoperative radiographs and at different periods of followup. The minimum followup was 3 years (mean, 8.3 years; range, 3-17 years).

Results: All fractures had healed, and all stems were clinically and radiographically stable at the end of followup. Nineteen hips showed nonprogressive radiographic subsidence during the first 3 postoperative months without clinical consequences. The cortical index and the lateral and medial cortical thickness increased over time. Increase of femoral cortex thicknesses was greater in cases with moderate preoperative osteoporosis and in cases with stems less than 16 mm in thickness.

Conclusions: Our data suggest an extensively porous-coated stem for Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures leads to a high rate of union and stable fixation. Cortical index and lateral cortex thickness increased in these patients with periprosthetic fractures. Patients with moderate osteoporosis and those using thin stems showed a major increase in femoral cortex thickness over time.

Citing Articles

Compliant Intramedullary Stems for Joint Reconstruction.

Mccullough J, Peterson B, Upfill-Brown A, Hardin T, Hopkins J, SooHoo N IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med. 2024; 12:314-327.

PMID: 38486844 PMC: 10939320. DOI: 10.1109/JTEHM.2024.3365305.


Is Stem Revision Necessary for Vancouver B2 Periprosthetic Hip Fractures? Analysis of Osteosynthesis Results from 39 Cases.

Gonzalez-Martin D, Gonzalez-Casamayor S, Herrera-Perez M, Guerra-Ferraz A, Ojeda-Jimenez J, Pais-Brito J J Clin Med. 2021; 10(22).

PMID: 34830570 PMC: 8625122. DOI: 10.3390/jcm10225288.


[Mid-term effectiveness of cerclage wires fixation in treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures associated with primary hip arthroplasty].

Cheng Q, Zhao F, Guo K, Zha G, Zheng X, Pang Y Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2018; 31(11):1291-1294.

PMID: 29798579 PMC: 8632582. DOI: 10.7507/1002-1892.201704133.


Could Patient Undergwent Surgical Treatment for Periprosthetic Femoral Fracture after Hip Arthroplasty Return to Their Status before Trauma?.

Zheng L, Lee W, Hwang D, Kang C, Noh C Hip Pelvis. 2016; 28(2):90-7.

PMID: 27536650 PMC: 4972891. DOI: 10.5371/hp.2016.28.2.90.

References
1.
Ko P, Lam J, Tio M, Lee O, Ip F . Distal fixation with Wagner revision stem in treating Vancouver type B2 periprosthetic femur fractures in geriatric patients. J Arthroplasty. 2003; 18(4):446-52. DOI: 10.1016/s0883-5403(03)00148-7. View

2.
Kolstad K . Revision THR after periprosthetic femoral fractures. An analysis of 23 cases. Acta Orthop Scand. 1994; 65(5):505-8. DOI: 10.3109/17453679409000900. View

3.
Kim Y, Kim J . Revision hip arthroplasty using strut allografts and fully porous-coated stems. J Arthroplasty. 2005; 20(4):454-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2004.09.054. View

4.
Parvizi J, Rapuri V, Purtill J, Sharkey P, Rothman R, Hozack W . Treatment protocol for proximal femoral periprosthetic fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 86-A Suppl 2:8-16. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200412002-00003. View

5.
Lee G, Nelson C, Virmani S, Manikonda K, Israelite C, Garino J . Management of periprosthetic femur fractures with severe bone loss using impaction bone grafting technique. J Arthroplasty. 2009; 25(3):405-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.01.024. View