Revision of failed humeral head resurfacing arthroplasty

Purpose:The purpose of this study is to assess the outcomes of a consecutive series of patients who underwent revision surgery after humeral head resurfacing (HHR). Our joint registry was queried for all patients who underwent revision arthroplasty for failed HHR at our institution from 2005 to 2010. Eleven consecutive patients (average age 54 years; range 38-69 years) that underwent revision of 11 resurfacing arthroplasties were identified. The primary indication for resurfacing had been osteoarthritis in six, glenoid dysplasia in two, a chondral lesion in two, and postinstability arthropathy in one patient. The indication for revision was pain in 10 and infection in one patient. Seven patients had undergone an average of 1.9 surgeries prior to resurfacing (range 1-3).Results:At a mean follow-up of 3.5 years (range 1.6-6.9 years), modified Neer score was rated as satisfactory in five patients and unsatisfactory in six. Abduction and external rotation improved from 73° to 88° (P = 0.32) and from 23° to 32° (P = 0.28) respectively. Reoperation was required in two patients, including one hematoma and one revision for instability.Conclusion:Outcomes of revision of HHR arthroplasty in this cohort did not improve upon those reported for revision of stemmed humeral implants. A comparative study would be required to allow for definitive conclusions to be made.     

Periprosthetic humeral fractures in shoulder arthroplasty

Periprosthetic fractures associated with shoulder arthroplasty are uncommon but can be very difficult to treat. Treatment options depend on the timing of the fracture, the type of fracture, and the stability of the implant. Understanding these characteristics of periprosthetic fractures helps the practicing surgeon to avoid them and also to determine how best to manage them when they do occur.     

Femoral component neck fracture after failed hip resurfacing arthroplasty

Failure on the femoral side after third-generation metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty is suggested to be easily treated with conversion to conventional total hip arthroplasty. Clinical results of conversion for failed hip resurfacing arthroplasty with the use of primary femoral implants confirmed this for a short-term follow-up. We present a case of the occurrence of a stemmed femoral implant neck fracture in a patient who was earlier treated for a failed hip resurfacing. We advise to consider acetabular revision in case of (suspected) acetabular metal damage and to use a stem component with a relative large neck diameter.     

Periprosthetic femoral fractures after total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: The management of periprosthetic fracture following a total hip arthroplasty is difficult, requiring expertise in both trauma and revision surgery. With rising numbers of patients in the population living with hip prostheses in situ, the frequency of these fractures is increasing, and controversy remains over their ideal management. The objective of this study was to review all periprosthetic fractures at a single institution to identify injury and treatment patterns and their associated clinical outcomes. METHODS: Fifty-four periprosthetic fractures in 50 patients were reviewed to determine the relative frequency of fracture types, their complication rates and the clinical outcomes. Patient data were obtained through review of the clinical notes and individual patient follow up. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Oxford Hip Score and Harris Hip Score. RESULTS: The 54 fractures were classified using the Vancouver system, most of which were type B1 (20) or type B2 (10). The mean time to union for all fracture types was 4.6 months. A high non-union rate was seen among fractures fixed operatively. Fifteen per cent of fractures went on to develop loosening following treatment, suggesting an underrecognition at the time of injury. The average Harris Hip Score was 73.1 and Oxford Hip Score 30.3 for all fracture types at a mean follow up of 3.3 years. In the 15 patients treated with revision surgery, the most common complication was dislocation (27%). CONCLUSION: Treatment of patients with periprosthetic fractures requires recognition of the challenging nature of these injuries, the associated poor prognosis and the high complication rate.     

Periprosthetic femoral supracondylar fracture after total knee arthroplasty with navigation system

We report 1 patient with a supracondylar periprosthetic fracture 1 month after computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. The fracture line extended from previous anchoring pinholes into the supracondyle area. Intramedullary nailing of the left femur was performed under close reduction. The possible complication of pinhole fracture to total knee arthroplasty with navigation system should be kept in mind.     

Periprosthetic fracture between a constrained total knee arthroplasty and a long-stem total hip arthroplasty: treatment with a novel device

Supracondylar fracture of the femur occurred in a patient with a well-fixed constrained condylar total knee arthroplasty and an 8-in total hip femoral revision component. This unusual fracture was treated with a novel interpositional femoral intramedullary device that connected the total knee to total hip arthroplasty. The result was good at 5 years, with healed fracture and no loosening or osteolysis of either component.     

Periprosthetic femoral fracture after total hip arthroplast

Periprosthetic femoral fractures represent a significant complication in total hip arthroplasty. based on originand treatment considerations, these fractures are best considered on the basis of the proximal region, and middle region below the lesser trochanter, and distal region at the prosthetic tip and beyond. Proximal-region fractures are usually wired and treated conservatively. Middle-region fractures may require prosthetic revision in addition to fracture fixation.Distal-region fractures are most difficult and may need advanced techniques, such as distal prosthetic fixation and allograft femoral plates.     

The use of a revision femoral stem to manage a distal femoral periprosthetic fracture in a well-fixed total knee arthroplasty

Managing very distal femoral periprosthetic fracture above a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a difficult problem. When a cruciate sacrificing TKA is used, bone stock around the implant is compromised and, therefore, can limit fixation options. We present technique using the revision system femoral stem for the PFC Sigma TKA (Depuy; Leeds, England) to stabilize this particular type of fracture.