Revision Arthroplasty in Vancouver B1 Periprosthetic Hip Fractures
Keywords:
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip, Periprosthetic Fractures/diagnosis, Periprosthetic Fractures/surgery, Postoperative Complications, ReoperationAbstract
Introduction: Periprosthetic hip fractures (PHF) represent an important complication after hip arthroplasty. The management of Vancouver B1 fractures remains elusive. While most stems may present radiographically as stable, stem fixation may in fact be compromised. Choosing plate osteosynthesis as a treatment in this type of fractures, trusting radiographic studies alone may lead to implant failure.Methods: We reviewed 10 years of our institution ́s clinical records (20112021) and found a total of 161 PHF. Twenty five cases of B1 periprosthetic fractures were included in our study, after their presenting radiographs were blindly reviewed. All PHFs were submitted to arthrotomy, dislocation and stability assessment. Stable implants were submitted to plate osteosynthesis, and unstable implants were submitted to revision arthroplasty. Demographic information, duration of surgery, blood loss, inpatient complications, functional outcomes, and outpatient outcomes and complications were recorded. Mean time of followup was 47 months.
Results: Seventytwo percent of of initially classified B1 type fractures presented with a loose stem and required revision arthroplasty. Time until supported ambulation was lower in the revision arthroplasty group (p= 0.01) while surgical time, blood loss after surgery, and inpatient complications presented similar results in both groups. Negative outpatient outcomes showed similar rates in both groups.
Conclusion: Most radiographically wellfixed implants were in fact unstable. Stability assessment using radiographic studies alone proves insufficient and may lead to inadequate osteosynthesis treatment. As such, inoperative stability testing in all B1 type fractures is paramount. Revision arthroplasty permitted early ambulation and showed no greater complications when comparing with osteosynthesis.
Downloads
References
OECD. Health at a Glance 2019: OECD Indicators, Paris: OECD Publishing; 2019, doi: 10.1787/4dd50c09en.
Lindahl H, Malchau H, Herberts P, Garellick G. Periprosthetic femoral fractures classification and demographics of 1049 periprosthetic femoral fractures from the Swedish National Hip Arthroplasty Register. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:85765. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2005.02.001
Saskatchewan Health Authority. Annual report to the legislature 2018-2019: Healthy People, Healthy Saskatchewan. [accessed Jan 2023] Available at: https://www.saskhealthauthority.ca/sites/default/files/202307/ReportCECSHAAnnual201819.pdf
Lindahl H. Epidemiology of periprosthetic femur fracture around a total hip arthroplasty. Injury. 2007;38:6514. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2007.02.048
Berry DJ. Epidemiology: hip and knee. Orthop Clin North Am.1999;30:18390. doi:10.1016/s00305898(05)700730
Dehghan N, McKee MD, Nauth A, Ristevski B, Schemitsch EH. Surgical fixation of Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic femur fractures: a systematic review. J Orthop Trauma.2014;28:7217. doi:10.1097/ bot.0000000000000126
Patsiogiannis N, Kanakaris NK, Giannoudis PV. Periprosthetic hip fractures: an update into their management and clinical outcomes. EFORT Open Rev. 2021;6:7592. doi:10.1302/20585241.6.200050
Moreta J, Aguirre U, de Ugarte OS, Jáuregui I, Mozos JL. Functional and radiological outcome of periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip arthroplasty. Injury. 2015;46:2928. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2014.07.013
Moreta J, Uriarte I, Ormaza A, Mosquera J, Iza K, Aguirre U, et al. Outcomes of Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures after total hip arthroplasty in elderly patients. Hip Int. 2019;29:184 90. doi:10.1177/1120700018772163
Boylan MR, Riesgo AM, Paulino CB, Slover JD, Zuckerman JD, Egol KA. Mortality following periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures versus native hip fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018;100:57885. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.17.00539.
Ciriello V, Chiarpenello R, Tomarchio A, Marra F, Egidio AC, Piovani L. The management of Vancouver B1 and C periprosthetic fractures: radiographic and clinic outcomes of a monocentric consecutive series. Hip Int. 2020;30:94100. doi:10.1177/1120700020971727
Chakrabarti D, Thokur N, Ajnin S. Cable plate fixation for Vancouver type-B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures - Our experience and identification of a subset at risk of non-union. Injury. 2019;50:23015. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2019.10.012
Phillips JR, Boulton C, Morac CG, Manktelov AR. What is the financial cost of treating periprosthetic hip fractures? Injury. 2011;42:1469. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2010.06.003
Jones AR, Williams T, Paringe V, White SP. The economic impact of surgically treated peri-prosthetic hip fractures on a university teaching hospital in Wales 7.5-year study. Injury. 2016;47:42831. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2015.11.012
Duncan CP, Masri BA. Fractures of the femur after hip replacement. Instr Course Lect. 1995;44:293304.
Brady OH, Garbuz DS, Masri BA, Duncan CP. The reliability and validity of the Vancouver classification of femoral fractures after hip replacement. J Arthroplasty. 2000;15:5962. doi:10.1016/s0883 5403(00)911811
Rayan F, Dodd M, Haddad FS. European validation of the Vancouver classification of periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:15769. doi:10.1302/0301620x.90b12.20681
Masri BA, Meek RM, Duncan CP. Periprosthetic fractures evaluation and treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004:80-95. doi:10.1097/00003086-200403000-00012
Abdel MP, Houdek MT, Watts CD, Lewallen DG, Berry DJ. Epidemiology of periprosthetic femoral fractures in 5417 revision total hip arthroplasties: a 40-year experience. Bone Joint J. 2016;98b:46874. doi:10.1302/0301620x.98b4.37203
Lindahl H, Garellick G, Regnér H, Herberts P, Malchau H. Three hundred and twenty-one periprosthetic femoral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:121522. doi:10.2106/jbjs.E.00457
Corten K, Vanrykel F, Bellemans J, Frederix PR, Simon JP, Broos PL. An algorithm for the surgical treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the femur around a wel-fixed femoral component. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91:142430. doi:10.1302/0301620x.91b11.22292
Berry DJ. Management of periprosthetic fractures: the hip. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17:113. doi:10.1054/arth.2002.32682
Lindahl H, Malchau H, Odén A, Garellick G. Risk factors for failure after treatment of a periprosthetic fracture of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:2630. doi:10.1302/0301620x.88b1.17029
Okudera Y, Kijima H, Yamada S, Konishi N, Kubota H, Tazawa H, et al. The location of the fracture determines the better solution, osteosynthesis or revision, in periprosthetic femoral fractures. J Orthop. 2020;22:2204. doi:10.1016/j.jor.2020.05.007
Froberg L, Troelsen A, Brix M. Periprosthetic Vancouver type B1 and C fractures treated by locking-plate osteosynthesis: fracture union and reoperations in 60 consecutive fractures. Acta Orthop. 2012;83:648 52. doi:10.3109/17453674.2012.747925
Laurer HL, Wutzler S, Possner S, Geiger EV, El Saman A, Marzi I, et al. 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. 2011;131:983 9. doi:10.1007/s004020111272y
Buttaro MA, Farfalli G, Paredes Núñez M, Comba F, Piccaluga F. Locking compression plate fixation of Vancouver type-B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:19649. doi:10.2106/ jbjs.F.01224
Yasen AT, Haddad FS. The management of type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures: when to fix and when to revise. Int Orthop. 2015;39:18739. doi:10.1007/s0026401426172
Tower SS, Beals RK. Fractures of the femur after hip replacement: the Oregon experience. Orthop Clin North Am. 1999;30:23547. doi:10.1016/s00305898(05)70078x
Cassidy JT, Kenny P, Keogh P. Failed osteosynthesis of cemented B1 periprosthetic fractures. Injury. 2018;49:192730. doi:10.1016/j. injury.2018.07.030
Gutiérrez Del Alamo J, Garcia-Cimbrelo E, Castellanos V, Gil-Garay E. Radiographic bone regeneration and clinical outcome with the Wagner SL revision stem: a 5-year to 12-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:51524. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2006.04.029
Tsiridis E, Pavlou G, Venkatesh R, Bobak P, Gie G. Periprosthetic femoral fractures around hip arthroplasty: current concepts in their management. Hip Int. 2009;19:7586. doi:10.1177/112070000901900201
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 João C. Pereira, André Moreira, André Costa, Guilherme Correia, João B. Tinoco, Pedro Varanda, Eurico B. Rodrigues (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
