Loading…
Open reduction and internal fixation might be a valuable alternative to stem revision in Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures, irrespective of the stem’s design
Background The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures versus stem revision (SR) surgery. Methods Between 2004 and 2018, 39 patients were treated with SR and 31...
Saved in:
Published in: | Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery 2021-05, Vol.141 (5), p.871-878 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-56b4ca787f2979da08acfa93f0ca83a9fdb5e3e665c3a5de34e3380e45e9bf3f3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-56b4ca787f2979da08acfa93f0ca83a9fdb5e3e665c3a5de34e3380e45e9bf3f3 |
container_end_page | 878 |
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 871 |
container_title | Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery |
container_volume | 141 |
creator | Flury, Andreas Hasler, Julian Pagenstert, Geert Dimitriou, Dimitris Helmy, Naeder Finsterwald, Michael |
description | Background
The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures versus stem revision (SR) surgery.
Methods
Between 2004 and 2018, 39 patients were treated with SR and 31 with ORIF for a Vancouver type B2. Mean follow-up was 40.4 months for the ORIF group and 43.5 months for the SR group. 22 of 31 stems in the ORIF group were uncemented, of which 7 (23%) were short stems. Perioperative complications, intraoperative blood loss, revision rate, and mortality were recorded. Functional outcomes included Harris Hip Score, Parker Mobility Score and hip abductor strength.
Results
Both groups did not differ in the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Charlson comorbidity index, body mass index, age, and sex. Compared to SR, patients treated with ORIF had a decreased blood loss, transfusion rate, operation duration, and mortality. Total complication and re-operation rates were similar. The relative risk for complication and re-operation was 0.5 and 0.7, respectively, in favour of ORIF.
Conclusions
ORIF might be a valuable alternative to SR in the treatment of Vancouver type B2 periprosthetic fractures with shorter operation duration, lower blood loss and similar complication rate compared to SR. Moreover, re-stabilization seems possible irrespective of stem’s design or fixation technique.
Level of evidence
Level III |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00402-020-03568-3 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2432855348</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2513076167</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-56b4ca787f2979da08acfa93f0ca83a9fdb5e3e665c3a5de34e3380e45e9bf3f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUFu1TAQhi0Eoo_CBVggS2xYkGJn4sRe0qoUpErdANvIccavrhIn2M4T7LhGz8CtOEn98kqRWLAay_7mG2t-Ql5ydsIZa95FxipWFqxkBQNRywIekQ2voCpA8fox2TAFdSGZ4EfkWYw3jPFSKvaUHEHZNFJxtSG_rmb0NGC_mOQmT7XvqfMJg9cDte67Xm9Ht71OtEOq6U4Pi-6GfBxWKrkd0jTRmHDMnp2L-wbn6VftzbTsMNDTks4Y3BymmK4xOUMtjlPYDwjapCVgfEtdyGVGs_omSzO5On__vI20x-i2_jl5YvUQ8cV9PSZfPpx_PvtYXF5dfDp7f1kYaEQqRN1VRjeysaVqVK-Z1MZqBZYZLUEr23cCAetaGNCiR6gQQDKsBKrOgoVj8ubgzT_-tmBM7eiiwWHQHqcltmUFpRQCKpnR1_-gN9Oy312mBAfW1LxuMlUeKJNXEAPadg5u1OFHy1m7j7I9RNnmKNs1yhZy06t79dKN2D-0_MkuA3AAYn7yWwx_Z_9Hewf4066T</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2513076167</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Open reduction and internal fixation might be a valuable alternative to stem revision in Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures, irrespective of the stem’s design</title><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Flury, Andreas ; Hasler, Julian ; Pagenstert, Geert ; Dimitriou, Dimitris ; Helmy, Naeder ; Finsterwald, Michael</creator><creatorcontrib>Flury, Andreas ; Hasler, Julian ; Pagenstert, Geert ; Dimitriou, Dimitris ; Helmy, Naeder ; Finsterwald, Michael</creatorcontrib><description>Background
The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures versus stem revision (SR) surgery.
Methods
Between 2004 and 2018, 39 patients were treated with SR and 31 with ORIF for a Vancouver type B2. Mean follow-up was 40.4 months for the ORIF group and 43.5 months for the SR group. 22 of 31 stems in the ORIF group were uncemented, of which 7 (23%) were short stems. Perioperative complications, intraoperative blood loss, revision rate, and mortality were recorded. Functional outcomes included Harris Hip Score, Parker Mobility Score and hip abductor strength.
Results
Both groups did not differ in the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Charlson comorbidity index, body mass index, age, and sex. Compared to SR, patients treated with ORIF had a decreased blood loss, transfusion rate, operation duration, and mortality. Total complication and re-operation rates were similar. The relative risk for complication and re-operation was 0.5 and 0.7, respectively, in favour of ORIF.
Conclusions
ORIF might be a valuable alternative to SR in the treatment of Vancouver type B2 periprosthetic fractures with shorter operation duration, lower blood loss and similar complication rate compared to SR. Moreover, re-stabilization seems possible irrespective of stem’s design or fixation technique.
Level of evidence
Level III</description><identifier>ISSN: 0936-8051</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1434-3916</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00402-020-03568-3</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32778919</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Body mass index ; Bone surgery ; Comorbidity ; Fractures ; Joint surgery ; Medical personnel ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Morphology ; Mortality ; Orthopedics ; Prostheses ; Surgical techniques ; Transplants & implants ; Trauma ; Trauma Surgery ; X-rays</subject><ispartof>Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2021-05, Vol.141 (5), p.871-878</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-56b4ca787f2979da08acfa93f0ca83a9fdb5e3e665c3a5de34e3380e45e9bf3f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-56b4ca787f2979da08acfa93f0ca83a9fdb5e3e665c3a5de34e3380e45e9bf3f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0350-8101</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32778919$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Flury, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hasler, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pagenstert, Geert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dimitriou, Dimitris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Helmy, Naeder</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Finsterwald, Michael</creatorcontrib><title>Open reduction and internal fixation might be a valuable alternative to stem revision in Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures, irrespective of the stem’s design</title><title>Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery</title><addtitle>Arch Orthop Trauma Surg</addtitle><addtitle>Arch Orthop Trauma Surg</addtitle><description>Background
The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures versus stem revision (SR) surgery.
Methods
Between 2004 and 2018, 39 patients were treated with SR and 31 with ORIF for a Vancouver type B2. Mean follow-up was 40.4 months for the ORIF group and 43.5 months for the SR group. 22 of 31 stems in the ORIF group were uncemented, of which 7 (23%) were short stems. Perioperative complications, intraoperative blood loss, revision rate, and mortality were recorded. Functional outcomes included Harris Hip Score, Parker Mobility Score and hip abductor strength.
Results
Both groups did not differ in the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Charlson comorbidity index, body mass index, age, and sex. Compared to SR, patients treated with ORIF had a decreased blood loss, transfusion rate, operation duration, and mortality. Total complication and re-operation rates were similar. The relative risk for complication and re-operation was 0.5 and 0.7, respectively, in favour of ORIF.
Conclusions
ORIF might be a valuable alternative to SR in the treatment of Vancouver type B2 periprosthetic fractures with shorter operation duration, lower blood loss and similar complication rate compared to SR. Moreover, re-stabilization seems possible irrespective of stem’s design or fixation technique.
Level of evidence
Level III</description><subject>Body mass index</subject><subject>Bone surgery</subject><subject>Comorbidity</subject><subject>Fractures</subject><subject>Joint surgery</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Morphology</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Prostheses</subject><subject>Surgical techniques</subject><subject>Transplants & implants</subject><subject>Trauma</subject><subject>Trauma Surgery</subject><subject>X-rays</subject><issn>0936-8051</issn><issn>1434-3916</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kUFu1TAQhi0Eoo_CBVggS2xYkGJn4sRe0qoUpErdANvIccavrhIn2M4T7LhGz8CtOEn98kqRWLAay_7mG2t-Ql5ydsIZa95FxipWFqxkBQNRywIekQ2voCpA8fox2TAFdSGZ4EfkWYw3jPFSKvaUHEHZNFJxtSG_rmb0NGC_mOQmT7XvqfMJg9cDte67Xm9Ht71OtEOq6U4Pi-6GfBxWKrkd0jTRmHDMnp2L-wbn6VftzbTsMNDTks4Y3BymmK4xOUMtjlPYDwjapCVgfEtdyGVGs_omSzO5On__vI20x-i2_jl5YvUQ8cV9PSZfPpx_PvtYXF5dfDp7f1kYaEQqRN1VRjeysaVqVK-Z1MZqBZYZLUEr23cCAetaGNCiR6gQQDKsBKrOgoVj8ubgzT_-tmBM7eiiwWHQHqcltmUFpRQCKpnR1_-gN9Oy312mBAfW1LxuMlUeKJNXEAPadg5u1OFHy1m7j7I9RNnmKNs1yhZy06t79dKN2D-0_MkuA3AAYn7yWwx_Z_9Hewf4066T</recordid><startdate>20210501</startdate><enddate>20210501</enddate><creator>Flury, Andreas</creator><creator>Hasler, Julian</creator><creator>Pagenstert, Geert</creator><creator>Dimitriou, Dimitris</creator><creator>Helmy, Naeder</creator><creator>Finsterwald, Michael</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0350-8101</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210501</creationdate><title>Open reduction and internal fixation might be a valuable alternative to stem revision in Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures, irrespective of the stem’s design</title><author>Flury, Andreas ; Hasler, Julian ; Pagenstert, Geert ; Dimitriou, Dimitris ; Helmy, Naeder ; Finsterwald, Michael</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-56b4ca787f2979da08acfa93f0ca83a9fdb5e3e665c3a5de34e3380e45e9bf3f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Body mass index</topic><topic>Bone surgery</topic><topic>Comorbidity</topic><topic>Fractures</topic><topic>Joint surgery</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Morphology</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Prostheses</topic><topic>Surgical techniques</topic><topic>Transplants & implants</topic><topic>Trauma</topic><topic>Trauma Surgery</topic><topic>X-rays</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Flury, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hasler, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pagenstert, Geert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dimitriou, Dimitris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Helmy, Naeder</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Finsterwald, Michael</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest_Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Flury, Andreas</au><au>Hasler, Julian</au><au>Pagenstert, Geert</au><au>Dimitriou, Dimitris</au><au>Helmy, Naeder</au><au>Finsterwald, Michael</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Open reduction and internal fixation might be a valuable alternative to stem revision in Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures, irrespective of the stem’s design</atitle><jtitle>Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery</jtitle><stitle>Arch Orthop Trauma Surg</stitle><addtitle>Arch Orthop Trauma Surg</addtitle><date>2021-05-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>141</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>871</spage><epage>878</epage><pages>871-878</pages><issn>0936-8051</issn><eissn>1434-3916</eissn><abstract>Background
The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures versus stem revision (SR) surgery.
Methods
Between 2004 and 2018, 39 patients were treated with SR and 31 with ORIF for a Vancouver type B2. Mean follow-up was 40.4 months for the ORIF group and 43.5 months for the SR group. 22 of 31 stems in the ORIF group were uncemented, of which 7 (23%) were short stems. Perioperative complications, intraoperative blood loss, revision rate, and mortality were recorded. Functional outcomes included Harris Hip Score, Parker Mobility Score and hip abductor strength.
Results
Both groups did not differ in the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Charlson comorbidity index, body mass index, age, and sex. Compared to SR, patients treated with ORIF had a decreased blood loss, transfusion rate, operation duration, and mortality. Total complication and re-operation rates were similar. The relative risk for complication and re-operation was 0.5 and 0.7, respectively, in favour of ORIF.
Conclusions
ORIF might be a valuable alternative to SR in the treatment of Vancouver type B2 periprosthetic fractures with shorter operation duration, lower blood loss and similar complication rate compared to SR. Moreover, re-stabilization seems possible irrespective of stem’s design or fixation technique.
Level of evidence
Level III</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>32778919</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00402-020-03568-3</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0350-8101</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0936-8051 |
ispartof | Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2021-05, Vol.141 (5), p.871-878 |
issn | 0936-8051 1434-3916 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2432855348 |
source | Springer Nature |
subjects | Body mass index Bone surgery Comorbidity Fractures Joint surgery Medical personnel Medicine Medicine & Public Health Morphology Mortality Orthopedics Prostheses Surgical techniques Transplants & implants Trauma Trauma Surgery X-rays |
title | Open reduction and internal fixation might be a valuable alternative to stem revision in Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures, irrespective of the stem’s design |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T11%3A39%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Open%20reduction%20and%20internal%20fixation%20might%20be%20a%20valuable%20alternative%20to%20stem%20revision%20in%20Vancouver%20B2%20periprosthetic%20femoral%20fractures,%20irrespective%20of%20the%20stem%E2%80%99s%20design&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20orthopaedic%20and%20trauma%20surgery&rft.au=Flury,%20Andreas&rft.date=2021-05-01&rft.volume=141&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=871&rft.epage=878&rft.pages=871-878&rft.issn=0936-8051&rft.eissn=1434-3916&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00402-020-03568-3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2513076167%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-56b4ca787f2979da08acfa93f0ca83a9fdb5e3e665c3a5de34e3380e45e9bf3f3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2513076167&rft_id=info:pmid/32778919&rfr_iscdi=true |