全髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围Vancouver B型骨折治疗的随访研究

目的 探讨全髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围Vancouver B型骨折治疗方法的选择,总结同种异体皮质骨板移植重建股骨假体周围骨折的临床效果.方法 22例全髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折患者,男7例,女15例;年龄平均65岁(53～75岁).Vancouver分类B1型5例,B2型4例,B3型13例.B1型骨折采用异体皮质骨板移植加钢丝环扎治疗;B2型骨折选择加长股骨柄翻修;B3型骨折选择骨水泥柄翻修,加同种异体皮质骨板移植和钢丝环扎同定.所有患者均获得随访,随访时间平均67个月(37～95个月).采用Harris髋关节功能评分、X线片、外周血T淋巴细胞亚群、抗体免疫复合物检测 和核素骨显像对治疗结果进行评价.结果 22例患者骨折全部愈合,21例患者能自由行走,1例需要助 行器帮助.末次随访Harris评分平均89分(79～93分).患者未发生免疫排斥反应;术后3个月,骨折愈合,术后12个月,移植骨板与宿主骨骨性愈合,股骨皮质厚度增加3～5mm;核素骨显像骨板移植区放射性核素分布较对侧浓集.3例患者移植骨板出现部分吸收现象.术后2年.骨板与宿主骨融合,移植骨板吸收停止.结论 针对股骨假体周围骨折不同类型分别采取不同方法治疗能够取得较好疗效,同种异体皮质骨板移植在维持骨折稳定性、促进骨折愈合、增加局部骨量和改善骨强度方面有较好疗效.     

全髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折的治疗

目的 探讨人工全髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折的治疗方法及疗效. 方法 回顾性分析2005年7月至2010年6月收治且获得随访的13例人工全髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折,其中男6例,女7例;年龄51 ～ 80岁,平均67岁;骨折按Vancouver分型:B1型3例,B2型5例,B3型3例,C型2例.分别用钢丝或钢缆环扎固定,异体皮质骨板加钢丝环扎;长柄假体翻修;记忆合金环抱器、锁定加压钢板固定.结果 所有患者术后随访9 ～ 30个月,平均16个月.骨折均愈合,时间4～7个月,平均4.8个月.患者无感染、畸形愈合、假体松动脱位、内固定断裂和深静脉血栓形成.根据Harris髋关节功能评分:优7例,良5例,可1例. 结论 全髋关节置换术后假体周围骨折的治疗方案需结合骨折部位、假体有无松动、局部骨质量、身体状况而制定,原则是移位骨折要进行牢固固定、松动假体要进行翻修、严重骨缺损需要植骨处理.     

全髋关节翻修术中股骨假体周围骨折的处理

目的研究全髋关节翻修术中股骨假体周围骨折的治疗方法。方法对2002年10月至2007年2月在全髋关节翻修术中出现股骨假体周围骨折的32例非感染翻修患者进行回顾性分析。采用Vancouver分型方法对骨折进行分类,其中A型11例,B型16例,C型2例,同时发生A、B型骨折的3例。24例采用加长广泛涂层柄翻修联合异体皮质骨板固定,6例采用加长广泛涂层柄加钢丝固定,1例采用骨水泥假体,1例仅采用异体皮质骨板固定。结果28例患者获得随访,平均随访时间23.5个月(3~56个月)。术后12~22周所有患者骨折均愈合(平均17.5周)。1例患者术后患肢疼痛,2例同侧膝关节僵直。术后平均Harris评分为92分。结论绝大多数翻修术中出现股骨假体周围骨折的患者能顺利恢复功能。非骨水泥广泛涂层柄可能是较好的选择。异体皮质骨板移植对骨量较差的患者来说是有用的技术。     

全髋关节置换假体柄周围骨折的治疗

目的 :回顾性研究全髋关节置换假体柄周围骨折的治疗及预防。方法 :将本院近年收治的全髋置换假体柄周围骨折的 8例病例按Vancouver分类方法进行分类 ,其中A1型 3例 ,B1型 3例 ,B2型 1例 ,B3型 1例 ,分别用钢丝环扎固定 ,异体皮质骨板加钢丝环扎 ;骨水泥长柄假体翻修。结果 :术后随访 8～ 18个月 ,骨折愈合 ,假体固定可靠。结论 :全髋关节置换术后假体柄周围骨折用Vancouver分类方法分类 ,简单、适用。采用异体皮质骨板与钢丝环扎固定骨折 ,治疗假体柄周围骨折 ,不仅固定可靠而且能促进骨折愈合、恢复骨量。     

Vancouver B型股骨假体周围骨折的治疗

目的 探讨全髋关节置换术后Vancouver B型股骨假体周围骨折的治疗方法及其临床疗效.方法 收治全髋关节置换术后Vancouver B型股骨假体周围骨折7例,分别采用锁定加压钢板联合钢丝捆扎,生物型或骨水泥型长柄假体翻修联合钢丝捆扎、局部异体松质骨植骨,生物型长柄假体翻修联合钢丝捆扎、局部自体髂骨植骨治疗.结果 平均随访21个月,骨折均愈合,对位、对线好,平均愈合时间为3.5个月.末次随访时Harris评分平均84分,术后无感染、脱位、深静脉血栓等并发症发生.结论 Vancouver B型骨折应积极采取手术治疗,根据不同的骨折类型选择不同的治疗方法能取得较好的临床疗效.     

全涂层远端固定长柄假体治疗髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折的临床研究

目的分析全涂层远端固定长柄假体治疗髋关节置换术后假体周围骨折的临床效果。方法回顾性分析35例使用全涂层远端固定长柄假体治疗的髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折病例,根据Vancouver分型,B2型12例,B3型20例,C型3例,通过Harris评分对患髋进行功能评价,X线片观察骨折愈合、股骨柄下沉情况。结果3例行单纯长柄假体翻修,10例行长柄假体翻修＋钢丝环扎固定,22例行长柄假体翻修＋同种异体颗粒骨压配植骨＋同种异体骨板捆绑固定治疗,平均随访4．5年,所有骨折均顺利愈合,平均愈合时间为15．3周,Harris评分平均86．5分,2例股骨柄分别下沉3mm和4mm,均在术后3个月达到稳定,32例假体获得骨长入固定,3例获得稳定的纤维固定,未发现骨溶解、感染以及再发骨折。结论髋关节置换术后假体周围骨折选择全涂层远端固定长柄假体翻修,根据骨缺损严重程度合理选择同种异体颗粒骨打压植骨＋同种异体骨板捆绑固定可以获得良好的临床效果。     

全髋关节置换术后温哥华B型假体周围骨折的治疗

背景:全髋关节置换手术是目前最为成功有效的外科手术之一,与之伴随的是多种术后并发症的出现,假体周围骨折是其中最显著的并发症之一,发病率有上升趋势。目的:回顾性研究全髋关节置换术后温哥华B型股骨假体周围骨折的治疗措施。方法:2006年1月至2011年1月收治全髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折33例,男17例,女16例;年龄38～81岁,平均68.2 岁。33 例均为温哥华 B 型假体周围骨折:B1 型骨折组 11 例,采取切开复位钢丝捆扎固定或接骨板固定+异体皮质骨板植骨;B2型骨折组16例,采用记忆合金环抱器+大量植骨或长柄全涂层假体联合钢丝捆扎+局部异体松质骨植骨;B3型骨折6例,采用长柄生物性假体或组配型假体+同种异体骨板联合钢丝捆扎。结果:全部获得随访,随访时间为0.5～5.5年,平均3.6年。髋关节功能恢复良好,骨折愈合,对位对线良好。骨折愈合时间为3～22个月,平均6.5个月。B1型骨折组中1例术后因跌倒再次骨折,行二次翻修手术,末次随访时Harris评分为82～96 分,平均 91.2 分;B2 型骨折组中 1 例术后 3 年出现假体松动下沉,行二次翻修手术,末次随访时 Harris 评分为 76～92 分,平均 87.0 分;B3 型骨折组中 1 例术后 3 个月出现移植骨排异反应与感染,经治疗无效,再次手术取出同种异体骨板,抗生素药物治疗后症状缓解,末次随访时Harris评分为66～80分,平均71.5分。无一例发生深静脉血栓形成、神经损伤等并发症。结论:股骨柄假体周围骨折中温哥华B型较常见,根据骨折类型选择不同的治疗方法,均可获得满意疗效。     

全髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折的治疗

目的：分析全髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折的病因和治疗结果．探讨其治疗方法。方法：回顾性研究自1998年12月-2003年3月治疗并随访观察的11例全髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折患者，男8例，女3例，平均年龄为56岁(43-75岁)，采用Vancouver分型，A型2例，B2型7例．B3型1例，C型1例。采用非手术治疗5例；手术治疗6例，其中1例为非手术治疗后骨折畸形愈合行翻修术。采用长柄假体翻修联合异体皮质骨板固定5例．其中使用非骨水泥型远端固定假体4例．使用骨水泥型假体1例。采用切开复位内固定治疗1例。结果：所有病例均获随访，平均随访25．6个月(7～50个月)。9例骨折愈合，平均愈合时间4个月(3-6个月)，2例骨折未愈合。均为非手术治疗病例，手术治疗6例骨折均愈合。至目前为止，7例假体稳定，1例翻修术后出现连续的影像学透亮线．3例假体松动，假体稳定的患者功能好于假体松动者．假体稳定患者的Harris评分平均91分。所有异体皮质骨板在1年内均与宿主骨整台．没有异体皮质骨板骨折发生。结论：假体稳定的A型骨折可以采用非手术治疗。对于B1型和C型骨折，如无手术禁忌证，应行切开复位内固定术。对于假体松动的骨折患者，使用长柄远端固定非骨水混型假体联合异体皮质骨板是最佳的治疗方法。     

人工髋关节股骨假体周围Vancouver B型骨折治疗的临床分析

目的探讨人工髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围Vancouver B型骨折患者,进行假体翻修、内固定治疗的效果。方法 2005年1月至2009年12月间,广州医科大学大学附属第一医院关节外科收治人工髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围B型骨折患者16例,其中11例为全髋,5例为半髋;男4例,女12例;年龄平均69岁(59~81岁);Vancouver分类B1型3例,B2型5例,B3型8例。B1型骨折采用内固定、或加异体皮质骨板移植治疗;B2型骨折选择加长股骨柄翻修、捆扎带环扎;B3型骨折选择加长股骨柄翻修、加同种异体皮质骨板移植和捆扎带环扎固定。所有患者均进行随访,随访时间平均90个月(5~9年)。采用Harris髋关节功能评分、X线片对治疗结果进行评价。结果 12例患者获得随访,骨折全部愈合,患者能自由行走,末次随访髋关节功能评分(Harris评分)平均90分(76~93分)。结论针对人工髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折的不同类型,分别采取切开复位内固定、加长股骨柄假体翻修、异体皮质骨板移植治疗,能取得较好疗效。     

人工髋关节置换术后假体柄周围股骨骨折的治疗

目的探讨人工髋关节置换术后假体柄周围股骨骨折的治疗计划以及临床效果。方法回顾自1988年1月至2001年6月本组收治的45例患者,依Vancouver分类系统,共有7例A型骨折,24例B1型骨折,7例B2型骨折,4例B3型骨折以及3例C型骨折。分别根据假体稳定度作骨折内固定或人工髋关节翻修手术,应用钢板加钢丝或钢索、Dall—Miles钢板、异体结构骨、异体骨碎片等,翻修手术应用常规骨柄或组合式股骨柄,并分析各类型骨折及各种治疗方式的结果与并发症。结果A型及B1型骨折的愈合率高,但必须注意钢板的长度;B2型骨折要注意翻修手术时的角度,避免术后出现脱臼;至于B3及C型则由于骨折复杂,并发症及失败率极高。因此,本研究提出关于这类损伤的治疗流程,让整个复杂程序更具逻辑性、简单性。结论人工髋关节置换术后假体柄周围股骨骨折是一个较复杂的问题。要获得成功的治疗,必须清楚判断骨折的特性,善用各种骨折治疗材料,以一个逻辑性思考做术前治疗计划,因此适当的分类系统显得特别重要。     

Cortical strut allografts in salvage revision arthroplasty: Surgical technique and clinical outcomes

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to present our clinical outcomes and surgical technique in strut allografts preparation using staggered holes to enhance osteointegration and demineralised bone matrix (DBM) as an adjunct to cortical strut allografts in salvage revision arthroplasty patients.MethodsRetrospective consecutive series of patients who required strut allograft femoral reconstructions with minimum 2 years follow up between 2012 and 2018. Frozen washed irradiated, cortical struts were used and prepared adding 2 mm staggered drill holes along the length of the strut and applying DBM paste on the graft-host interface. Outcome measures included radiographic strut union, graft resorption, infection and complications.Results15 patients included; 3 males and 12 females with median age 72 years (range 60–93). All had significant bony defects (Paprosky III/IV in 12 cases including 3 cases of periprosthetic hip fractures and further 3 cases of periprosthetic knee fractures around revision hinged implants). At final follow up, median 3.8 years (range 2.7–7.2), 14/15 (93.3%) struts had united at a median 6 months (range 5–8), complete incorporation with cortical round-off was seen at median 12 months (range 8–48) in 12/15 (80%) struts, 2/15 (13.3%) show radiographic evidence of proximal minimal graft resorptions although the remainder of the strut had integrated and were asymptomatic. There were no cases of infection.ConclusionsUse of strut allografts helps to reconstruct bone defects, restore bone stock, and provide stable fixation for complex patterns of periprosthetic fractures around hip/knee implants and salvage revision cases with 93.3% union rate at median 6 months.     

Wagner SL股骨柄治疗陈旧性或伴髋关节炎的股骨粗隆间骨折疗效观察

目的 :探讨Wagner SL股骨柄治疗陈旧性或伴痛性髋关节炎的股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效。方法 :自2006年1月至2009年12月对8例陈旧性粗隆间骨折及21例伤前有痛性关节炎的粗隆间骨折使用Wagner SL股骨柄行全髋关节置换并重建粗隆,其中男18例,女11例;年龄43~58岁,平均49岁。术后临床随访,根据Harris评分、肢体长度差异、髋关节活动范围以及髋外展肌力进行评价。影像学随访包括对股骨柄假体周围骨溶解、假体松动、透光线等进行评价。结果:29例患者均成功完成手术,未出现与髋关节置换手术相关的严重并发症。术后均获得随访,时间6~10年,平均8.2年。均无不可接受的大腿疼痛主诉。8例陈旧性粗隆间骨折患者术后首次行走时均有"手术侧肢体过长"抱怨,随时间推移,这种抱怨在明显减少。术后3个月X线片提示21例伤前痛性关节炎的粗隆间骨折愈合,平均术后6个月(3~8个月)X线片提示8例陈旧性粗隆间骨折患者的植骨块与粗隆有明显骨痂连接,末次随访时X线片均未提示假体明显下沉。髋关节活动度基本恢复正常,无髋外展无力。根据Harris评分方法,手术后6年以上对患髋关节进行评价,优18例,良9例,可2例。结论:Wagner SL股骨柄在治疗陈旧性或伴痛性髋关节炎患者粗隆间骨折的初次全髋关节置换中可取得优良的临床疗效,粗隆重建,有利假体和关节稳定,同时增加骨储备。     

Locking compression plate versus revision-prosthesis for Vancouver type B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures after total hip arthroplasty

IntroductionRevision arthroplasty is currently the recommended treatment for periprosthetic femoral fractures after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and stem loosening (Vancouver B2). However, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) utilizing locking compression plate (LCP) might be an effective treatment with a reduced surgical time and less complex procedure in a typically elderly patient collective with multiple comorbidities. The purpose of this study was to compare the functional and radiographic outcomes in two cohorts with Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures after primary THA, treated either by ORIF with LCP fixation, or by revision arthroplasty utilizing a non-cemented long femoral stem.Materials and Methods36 patients with Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures following THA, who had been treated between 2000 and 2014, were reviewed. Eight fractures were treated with LCP fixation, fourteen fractures with the first-generation revision prosthesis (Helios^®), and fourteen fractures with the second-generation revision prosthesis (Hyperion™). The patients were assessed clinically with the Parker mobility score and radiographically.ResultsA total of ten males and 26 females formed the basis of this report with an average age of 81years (range, 64 to 96 years). All fractures treated with LCP fixation alone healed uneventfully and there were no signs of secondary stem migration, malalignement or plate breakage. The average surgical time was shorter in the ORIF cohort; however, the results were not statistically significant. The postoperative Parker mobility score at latest follow-up showed no difference between the groups.ConclusionsAccording to the results of the current study, we conclude that the use of LCP fixation can be a sufficient option for the treatment of Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures correspondingly with femoral stem loosening.     

广泛微孔涂层非骨水泥假体治疗Vancouver B2型假体周围骨折

目的 评价广泛微孔涂层非骨水泥长柄假体治疗Vancouver B2型股骨假体周围骨折的疗效.方法 2002年10月至2007年5月对10例初次全髋置换术后Vancouver B2型假体周围骨折患者采用广泛微孔涂层非骨水泥长柄假体予以翻修,其中初次置换股骨柄为骨水泥固定者4例,非骨水泥固定6例.结果 10例患者均获随访,平均随访时间44个月(12～67个月),Harris评分平均为87.6分.所有患者骨折均愈合,骨折平均愈合时间4.6个月.8例骨长入稳定,2例纤维稳定,无假体松动和下沉,1例出现大腿痛,3例股骨近端出现应力遮挡.结论 广泛微孔涂层长柄非骨水泥假体治疗Vancouver B2型假体周围骨折,很好地控制了骨折端轴向和旋转稳定性,且骨与假体有很好的骨整合,为骨折的愈合提供了良好的环境,骨折愈合率高.     

Periprosthetic fracture of the femur after hip arthroplasty: The clinical outcome using cortical strut allografts

Between 1993 and 1998, 15 patients with periprosthetic fractures of the femur after hip arthroplasty were treated using deep-frozen cortical strut allografts as an adjunct support after internal fixation or revision arthroplasty. According to the Vancouver classification system, there were 7 type B1, 2 type B2, 4 type B3 and 2 type C fractures. Seven patients had severe osteopenia, 10 patients had bone defects between 2 to 7 cm and 2 were associated with infection. Nine patients had internal fixation of the fracture using a compression plate, and 6 had revision arthroplasty using a long-stemmed femoral prosthesis. The average length of the allograft was 13.9 cm. At an average follow-up of 31 months, all the patients had a satisfactory functional result except one who had a leg length discrepancy of 4 cm due to multiple operations. There were no non-unions, malunions or infections. The fractures healed between 10 to 24 weeks (average, 15.6 weeks). In conclusion, a cortical strut allograft associated with internal fixation can be an effective method of treating periprosthetic fractures of the femur after hip arthroplasty.     

Periprosthetic femoral fractures treated with a modular distally cemented stem

PURPOSE: To assess the treatment outcome of revision hip arthroplasty for Vancouver type B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures using a modular distally cemented stem. METHODS: 22 men and 14 women (37 hips) aged 66 to 79 (mean, 70) years underwent revision hip arthroplasty for Vancouver type B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures. The indication for surgery was periprosthetic fracture with stem loosening and loss of proximal bone stock. The patients were referred from other hospitals after previous surgeries had failed: 8 with 3 previous surgeries, 19 with 2, and 9 with one. Using a transtrochanteric approach, the existing prosthesis was removed and a modular proximal femoral replacement stem was inserted, bypassing the area of proximal femoral fracture and bone loss. The stem was distally cemented. Patients were immobilised within 48 hours of surgery. RESULTS: Patients were followed up for a mean of 14 (range, 8-18) years. The mean Harris hip score improved from 29 (range, 5-40) to 78 (range, 56-88); 24 patients attained excellent or good scores (>80), 10 attained fair, and 2 attained poor scores. The mean healing time was 7 (range, 6-14) months; there was no non-union. Improvement in proximal bone stock was noted on serial radiographs. None of the stems had cement fracture or migration, requiring revision. Two (5%) of the patients had dislocations. CONCLUSION: Vancouver type B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures can be successfully treated with a distally cemented modular proximal femoral replacement prosthesis.     

Early experience with the use of trochanteric reattachment plate for the treatment of Vancouver type B 1 periprosthetic hip fractures

ObjectiveThe purpose of our study is to study the usefulness of trochanteric reattachment plate in the management Vancouver type B 1 periprosthetic femur fractures.MethodsWe describe a case series of 15 (12 F: 3 M) Vancouver type B 1 fracture fixed with trochanteric reattachment plate with 3 years follow up. Patients with Vancouver A, B2, B3 and C fractures were excluded in the study. Clinical and radiological assessment of patients was done at 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 24 and 36 months. The parameters evaluated were fracture union, Harris hip score and post-operative complications if any.ResultsPatients mean age was 74 years (range 58–84). Eleven patients were operated with cemented hemiarthroplasty while 4 patients had total hip arthroplasty done before. Operation time mean was 137.2 min and mean surgical blood loss was 522.66 ml. All the patients achieved radiological union of the fracture at mean of 14.13 weeks. Mean Harris hip Score was 82 at 36 months follow up. 13 out of 15 hips (86.67%) showed good clinical results and 2 patients (13.33%) showed fair result. All the patients returned to their pre injury activities of daily living.ConclusionOperative fixation of Vancouver type B 1 periprosthetic fractures is a challenge for an orthopedic surgeon. Open reduction and internal fixation of these fractures using of trochanteric reattachment plate incorporating screws and cerclage wires through the plate provides good outcome in these patients. Use of this plate offers the surgeon stability against shearing as well as rotational forces.