» Articles » PMID: 35891970

Plate Osteosynthesis for Atypical Femoral Fractures in Patients with Severely Bowed Femurs: Comparing Short Versus Long Segment Fixation - a Case Series

Overview
Date 2022 Jul 27
PMID 35891970
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Intramedullary nail fixation is currently the modality of choice in surgical treatment for atypical femoral fractures (AFF). Its uses are limited, however, in severely bowed femurs, narrow medullary canals, or in the presence of thick endosteal callus at the apex of the femoral curve. In these cases, extramedullary plate osteosynthesis is preferred. The consideration when adopting plate osteosynthesis is whether a short or long segment fixation is superior. We hypothesize that a long segment fixation has the potential advantage of protecting the entire length of the femur from future fractures in the adynamic bone. In this series, we present two cases from our institution, with the aims of discussing the benefits and limitations of short versus long segment plate fixation in AFF.

Case Summary: We report two uncommon cases of bisphosphonate-related AFF in two Asian patients with severe femoral curvature, who were treated with extramedullary plate osteosynthesis at our institution. One patient underwent fixation with a short segment plate osteosynthesis, and the other received a long plate osteosynthesis spanning the proximal to distal femur in an attempt to protect the bone from future fractures. Both patients showed a favourable and uncomplicated course post-surgery, with early return to ambulation and radiographic bone union at follow up.

Conclusion: We expect to see an increase in the number of patients with AFF and bowed femurs, especially with the increased usage of bisphosphonates given an ageing Asian population. Surgical treatment with short and long plate osteosynthesis are options with their own advantages and limitations. With the advent of new anatomical plate options, long segment fixation has become more accessible and may be considered in this patient group as it has the potential advantage of protecting the adynamic femur from future fractures. Further studies should be targeted to determine which method of treatment is superior in this particular group of patients.

References
1.
Gautier E, Sommer C . Guidelines for the clinical application of the LCP. Injury. 2003; 34 Suppl 2:B63-76. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2003.09.026. View

2.
Jeremiah M, Unwin B, Greenawald M, Casiano V . Diagnosis and Management of Osteoporosis. Am Fam Physician. 2015; 92(4):261-8. View

3.
Kajja I, Bimenya G, Eindhoven B, Jan Ten Duis H, Sibinga C . Blood loss and contributing factors in femoral fracture surgery. Afr Health Sci. 2010; 10(1):18-25. PMC: 2895790. View

4.
Adler R, Fuleihan G, Bauer D, Camacho P, Clarke B, Clines G . Managing Osteoporosis in Patients on Long-Term Bisphosphonate Treatment: Report of a Task Force of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. J Bone Miner Res. 2016; 31(10):1910. DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.2918. View

5.
Gaston M, Simpson A . Inhibition of fracture healing. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007; 89(12):1553-60. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B12.19671. View