An international,cross-sectional survey of the management of Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures around total hip arthroplasties

IntroductionThe incidence of periprosthetic femoral fractures around total hip arthroplasties is increasing. Fractures around a stable implant stem (Vancouver type B1) are among the most common of these fractures. Various fixation strategies for Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic fractures have been reported in the literature; however, little high-level evidence exists. This study was designed to determine the current management strategies and opinions among orthopaedic surgeons treating Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures, and to evaluate the need for a large prospective randomized controlled trial for the management of these injuries.MethodsOrthopaedic surgeon members of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA), the Canadian Orthopaedic Association (COA), and the Hip Society were invited to participate in a 51-item web-based survey surrounding the management of periprosthetic femoral fractures around total hip replacements, as well as the perceived need for future research in this area. Responses were summarized using proportions, and further stratified by practice type, case volume, surgeon age, and fellowship training.ResultsFor Vancouver type B1 fractures, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with locked plating was favoured slightly over ORIF with cable plating ± cortical strut allograft (51.1% versus 45.5%). When compared to cable plating with cortical strut allograft, respondents believed that isolated locked plating resulted in lower nonunion and reoperation rates, but similar infection and malunion rates. Subgroup analyses revealed that practice type, surgeon age, case volume, and fellowship training influenced surgeons’ management of periprosthetic femoral fractures and beliefs regarding complications. There is high demand for a large prospective randomized controlled trial for Vancouver type B1 fracture fixation.ConclusionsConsensus surrounding the management of Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures is lacking, and there is a perceived need among orthopaedic surgeons for a large prospective randomized controlled trial in order to define the optimal management of these injuries.     

Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures in Cementless Short Versus Straight Stem Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis

BackgroundRecent studies indicate a decreased risk of periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) in cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) for short compared to straight stems. However, the results are still inconclusive. Therefore, we retrospectively investigated the rate of PFFs within the first year between cementless short and straight stem THA.MethodsA 1:1 propensity score matching of 3,053 THAs was performed. Two groups including 1,147 short stem THAs implanted through a minimally invasive antero-lateral approach and 1,147 straight stem THAs implanted through a transgluteal Hardinge approach were matched. The rates of PFFs and fracture patterns were compared between both stem types. Risk factors for PFFs were analyzed by multivariate regression analyses.ResultsThe overall rate of PFFs was 1.7% in short stem THA and 3.2% in straight stem THA (P = .015). Postoperatively detected Vancouver A fractures occurred significantly more often in straight stem THA (P = .002), while the occurrence Vancouver B fractures did not differ significantly (P = .563). The risk of PFFs was significantly increased for women in straight stem THA (Odds ratio (OR) 2.620; Confidence Interval (CI) 1.172-5.856; P = .019). Increasing age showed a significantly increased odds ratio in short stem (OR 1.103; CI 1.041-1.169, P < .001) and straight stem THA (OR 1.057; CI 1.014-1.101, P = .008).ConclusionShort stem THA reduces Vancouver Type A PFFs in the trochanteric region compared to straight stem THA, while Vancouver Type B fractures are comparable. Increasing age is a significant risk factor for both stem types, while the risk for PFFs in women was only significantly increased in the straight stem group.     

Anatomic versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty for post-traumatic sequelae of operatively and nonoperatively treated proximal humerus fractures

BackgroundThis study aimed to determine whether there is a long-term difference in outcomes between anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) performed for proximal humerus fracture (PHF) sequelae. Hypotheses were as follows: (1) patients undergoing aTSA would have improved functional outcomes but a greater incidence of adverse events (AEs) and reoperation than those undergoing rTSA and (2) patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty after open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) would have worse outcomes with more AEs and reoperations than those undergoing shoulder arthroplasty for sequelae of nonoperatively managed PHF.MethodsA prospectively collected database was queried for patients with PHF sequelae undergoing aTSA or rTSA between 2007 and 2020 with minimum 2-year follow-up. Baseline demographics, perioperative data, postoperative AEs, functional outcomes, and range of motion (ROM) were compared between aTSA and rTSA groups. A secondary analysis was performed to compare patients treated with prior PHF ORIF vs. those treated nonoperatively.ResultsThere were 17 patients in the aTSA group and 83 patients in the rTSA group. Type I PHF sequelae predominated among patients who underwent aTSA (71% vs. 40%, P = .026). Incidence of total postoperative AEs was greater after aTSA than that after rTSA (12% vs. 5%, P = .277), with a significantly higher rate of glenoid aseptic loosening after aTSA (6% vs. 0%, P = .026). All AEs required reoperation except one in the rTSA group. The mean follow-up was 66 months for aTSA compared with 45 months for rTSA (P = .002). No differences in functional outcomes or ROM between aTSA and rTSA persisted beyond 3 months or at the final follow-up except external rotation, which favored aTSA for 3 years postoperatively. In the secondary analysis, there were 33 patients in the ORIF group and 67 in the non-ORIF group. One (3%) postoperative AE occurred in the ORIF group vs. five (7%) in the non-ORIF group (P = .385). At a mean follow-up of 4 years, there were no differences in functional outcome scores or ROM between ORIF and non-ORIF groups, except for patient-reported shoulder function (6.3 vs. 7.4, respectively, P = .037).ConclusionFor treatment of PHF sequelae, aTSA may result in a higher incidence of postoperative AEs and reoperation than rTSA, particularly due to glenoid aseptic loosening. No difference in functional outcome scores between aTSA and rTSA persists beyond 3 months or at the final follow-up. Although active external rotation is significantly improved after aTSA for the first 3 years postoperatively, no differences in ROM exist beyond 4 years at the final follow-up. Patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty for PHF sequelae have comparable outcomes regardless of prior ORIF or nonoperative management.Level of evidenceLevel III; Retrospective Cohort Design; Treatment Study     

Prior surgical fixation of proximal humerus fractures is associated with increased complications following subsequent reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to compare complication rates between patients undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) after a prior open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for proximal humerus fracture (PHF) to those undergoing RSA as a primary treatment for PHFs, glenohumeral osteoarthritis, or rotator cuff tear arthropathy (CTA).MethodsPatients who underwent RSA between 2015 and 2020 were identified in the Mariner database. Patients were separated into 3 mutually exclusive groups: (1) RSA for osteoarthritis, rotator cuff tear, or CTA (Control-RSA); (2) RSA as a primary treatment for PHF (PHF-RSA); and (3) RSA for patients with prior ORIF of PHFs (ORIF-RSA). Ninety-day medical and 2-year postoperative surgical complications were identified. In addition, patients in the PHF-RSA group were subdivided into those undergoing RSA for PHF within 3 months of the fracture (acute) vs. those treated greater than 3 months from diagnosis (delayed). Multivariate regression was performed to control for differences in comorbidities and demographics.ResultsA total of 30,824 patients underwent primary RSA for arthritis or CTA, 5389 patients underwent RSA as a primary treatment for a PHF, and 361 patients underwent RSA after ORIF of a PHF. ORIF before RSA was associated with an increased risk of overall revision (odds ratio [OR] 2.45, P = .002), infection (OR 2.40, P < .001), instability (OR 2.43, P < .001), fracture (OR 3.24, P = .001), minor medical complications (OR 1.59, P = .008), and readmission (OR 2.55, P = .001) compared with the Control-RSA cohort. RSA as a primary treatment for PHF was associated with an increased risk of 2-year revision (OR 1.60, P < .001), infection (OR 1.51, P < .001), instability (OR 2.84, P < .001), and fracture (OR 2.54, P < .001) in addition to major medical complications (OR 2.02, P < .001), minor medical complications (OR 1.92, P < .001), 90-day emergency department visits (OR 1.26, P < .001) and 90-day readmission (OR 2.03, P < .001) compared with the Control-RSA cohort. The ORIF-RSA group had an increased risk of periprosthetic infection (OR 1.94, P = .002) when compared with the PHF-RSA cohort. There were no differences in medical or surgical complications in the RSA-PHF cohort between patients treated in an acute or delayed fashion.ConclusionRSA following ORIF of a PHF is associated with increased complications compared with patients undergoing RSA for nonfracture indications. Prior ORIF of a PHF is also an independent risk factor for postoperative infection after RSA compared with patients who undergo RSA as a primary operation for fracture. The timing of RSA as a primary operation for PHF does not appear to impact the rates of postoperative medical and surgical complications.     

Periprosthetic Fractures of the Distal Femur: Is Open Reduction and Internal Fixation or Distal Femoral Replacement Superior?

BackgroundThe purpose of this study is to compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) to distal femoral replacement (DFR) for treatment of displaced periprosthetic distal femur fractures.MethodsWe identified 72 patients with minimum 2-year follow-up following a displaced periprosthetic distal femur fracture: 50 were treated with ORIF and 22 with DFR. Outcomes were assessed with multivariate regression analysis and include Knee Society Scores (KSS), infection rates, revision incidence, and mortality.ResultsPatients treated with DFR had a higher Charlson comorbidity index (5.2 vs 3.8; P = .006). The mean postoperative KSS were similar between groups, but the Knee Society Functional Scores were higher in the ORIF group (P = .01). Six ORIF patients (12%) and 3 DFR patients (14%) underwent a revision surgery (P = .1). In the ORIF group, 3 revisions were associated with periprosthetic infection, and 3 revisions occurred for aseptic nonunion. In the DFR group, 1 infection was treated with irrigation and debridement, and 2 cases of patellar maltracking resulted in 1 liner exchange with soft tissue release and 1 femoral revision for malrotation. More patients in the ORIF group required repeat revisions, with twice as many total revisions (P < .001). Six ORIF patients and 7 DFR patients died within 2 years (P = .26).ConclusionThe Knee Society Functional Score favored ORIF, but the total incidence of revision was higher in the ORIF cohort. Given the high mortality and the substantial risk of reoperation in both groups, additional studies are needed regarding the prevention of and optimal treatment for patients with periprosthetic distal femur fractures.     

Preoperative Posterior Tilt Increases the Risk of Later Conversion to Arthroplasty After Osteosynthesis for Femoral Neck Fracture

BackgroundFemoral neck fractures (FNFs) are one of the most common injuries in the elderly. Treatment is either internal fixation or primary arthroplasty. The main aim of this study is to assess the risk factors associated with fixation failure leading to further arthroplasty in FNFs treated with cannulated screws.MethodsData on internal fixations of FNFs performed at Turku University Hospital between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2017 were collected retrospectively from the patient database. Radiographical measurements were performed for preoperative displacement and posterior tilt, postoperative displacement, reduction quality, and implant shaft angle.ResultsAltogether 301 cases were included in the study. The overall reoperation rate was 25% and conversion to arthroplasty was performed in 16% of cases. In the multiple variant analysis, adjusted for age and gender, nondisplaced fractures with a 0°-20° preoperative posterior tilt had a significantly lower risk of later conversion to arthroplasty than did nondisplaced fractures with a ≤0° or ≥20° posterior tilt (odds ratio [OR] 4.0, 95% confidence interval [Cl] 1.8-8.6, P = .0005) and displaced fractures (OR 7.2, 95% CI 3.0-17.4, P < .0001). No statistically significant association was found between preoperatively nondisplaced fractures with a <0° or ≥20° posterior tilt and displaced fractures (OR 0.6, 95% Cl 0.2-1.3, P = .2).ConclusionDisplaced fractures and fractures with a preoperative posterior tilt of <0° or ≥20° have a considerably increased risk of reoperation and conversion to arthroplasty. Primary arthroplasty should be considered as treatment for displaced FNFs and fractures with >20° or <0° posterior tilt, especially in fragile patients, to avoid further operations.     

Hip Arthroplasty Femoral Stem Designs and Their Association With Early Postoperative Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures

BackgroundPeriprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) in total hip arthroplasty (THA), especially those in contact with the diaphyseal stem, carry high morbidity. This study evaluated how stem design influences the risk of early Vancouver B PFF or other PFF requiring operative intervention after THA.MethodsA multicenter, retrospective study of 3,433 primary cementless THAs performed from 2014 to 2021 included 2,302 single-taper (micro M/L [n = 1,169]; M/L [n = 1,133]) and 1,131 double-taper (fit-and-fill [n = 420]; compaction-collared [n = 711]) stems. Mean follow-up was 2.2 years (range, 0.3 to 6.5 years). Primary outcomes were Vancouver B and surgically treated postoperative PFFs among differing femoral stems. Secondary outcomes included rates of intraoperative and postoperative Vancouver A and C PFFs.ResultsForty five postoperative PFFs (1.3%) occurred within 8.8 weeks (median), 25 of which were Vancouver B (0.7%) and 20 total PFFs that required operative intervention (0.6%). Compaction-collared stems had a decreased risk of Vancouver B (hazard ratio 0.18, 95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.97 P = .044) and any surgically treated PFF (hazard ratio 0.10, 95% confidence interval: 0.01-0.95; P = .037). Intraoperative PFFs were most common with fit-and-fill stems (3.6%, P < .001) and Vancouver A with compaction-collared stems (1.8%, P < .001). The cohort with PFF had a higher Charlson comorbidity index (P = .004), more women (P = .001), more Dorr A or C femora (P = .013), and more posterior or lateral surgical approaches compared to those without PFF (P ≤ .001).ConclusionAfter controlling for confounding variables, compaction-collared stems had a significantly lower risk of postoperative Vancouver B and PFF requiring operative treatment than single-taper and double-taper stems.     

Intraoperative Complications and Early Return to the Operating Room in Total Hip Arthroplasty Performed Through the Direct Anterior and Posterior Approaches. An Institutional Experience of Surgeons After Their Learning Curve

BackgroundProponents of the direct anterior approach (DAA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) claim a faster recovery, whereas critics claim an increased risk of early femoral complications. This study analyzed intraoperative and postoperative complications requiring reoperation within one year after THA through the DAA and posterior approach (PA).MethodsA total of 2348 elective, unilateral DAA THAs in patients with osteoarthritis performed between 2016 and 2019 were matched 1:1 for age (±5 years), gender, body mass index (±5), and femoral fixation with 2348 patients who underwent PA THA during the same period. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used. Odds ratios were reported for the occurrence of intraoperative femoral fracture, postoperative femoral fracture, infection, dislocation, and other etiologies requiring reoperation within one year.ResultsIntraoperative femoral fracture occurred in 12 DAA (0.5%) and 14 PA (0.6%) patients. Twenty-five patients (1.06%) in the DAA and 28 (1.19%) in the PA group underwent reoperation within the first year. Reoperations were due to periprosthetic fracture (40%), infection (28%), dislocation (23%), and other (9%). Regression analysis revealed no difference in intraoperative femoral fracture (odds ratio (OR): 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.40-1.86, P = .69), postoperative femoral fracture (OR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.47-2.60, P = .83), infection (OR: 1.50, 95% CI: 0.53-5.23, P = .44), or reoperation within one year for other reasons (OR: 1.50, 95% CI: 0.25-9.00, P = .65). DAA had fewer dislocations requiring reoperation (OR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.04-0.91, P = .02).ConclusionThis comparative study did not find differences in intraoperative or postoperative fracture or infection between DAA and PA. DAA was associated with a lower likelihood of reoperation for dislocation within one year of surgery.     

Outcomes of Total Hip Arthroplasty After Acetabular Open Reduction and Internal Fixation in the Elderly—Acute vs Delayed Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundOptimum management for the elderly acetabular fracture remains undefined. Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in this population does not allow early weight-bearing and has an increased risk of failure. This study aimed to define outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the setting of an acetabular fracture and compared delayed THA after acetabular ORIF (ORIF delayed THA) and acute fixation and THA (ORIF acute THA).MethodsAll acetabular fractures in patients older than 60 years who underwent ORIF between 2007 and 2018 were reviewed (n = 85). Of those, 14 underwent ORIF only initially and required subsequent THA (ORIF delayed THA). Twelve underwent an acute THA at the time of the ORIF (ORIF acute THA). The ORIF acute THA group was older (81 ± 7 vs 76 ± 8; P < .01) but had no other demographic- or injury-related differences compared with the ORIF delayed THA group. Outcome measures included operative time, length of stay, complications, radiographic assessments (component orientation, leg-length discrepancy, heterotopic ossification), and functional outcomes using the Oxford Hip Score (OHS).ResultsOperative time (P = .1) and length of stay (P = .5) for the initial surgical procedure (ORIF only or ORIF THA) were not different between groups. Four patients had a complication and required further surgeries; no difference was seen between groups. Radiographic assessments were similar between groups. The ORIF acute THA group had a significantly better OHS (40.1 ± 3.9) than the ORIF delayed THA group (33.6 ± 8.5) (P = .03).ConclusionIn elderly acetabulum fractures, ORIF acute THA compared favorably (a better OHS, single operation/hospital visit, equivalent complications) with ORIF delayed THA. We would thus recommend that in patients with risk factors for failure requiring delayed THA (eg, dome or roof impaction) that ORIF acute THA be strongly considered.     

Nationwide Analysis of Lower Extremity Periprosthetic Fractures

BackgroundAlthough the annual incidence of primary total joint arthroplasty is increasing, trends in the annual incidence of periprosthetic fractures have not been established. This study aimed to define the annual incidence of periprosthetic fractures in the United States.MethodsInpatient admission data for 60,887 surgically treated lower extremity periprosthetic fractures between 2006 and 2015 were obtained from the National Inpatient Sample database. The annual incidence of periprosthetic fractures was defined as the number of new cases per year and presented as a population-adjusted rate per 100,000 US individuals. Univariable methods were used for trend analysis and comparisons between groups.ResultsThe national annual incidence of periprosthetic fractures presented as a population-adjusted rate of new cases per year peaked in 2008 (2.72; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.39-3.05), remained stable from 2010 (1.65; 95% CI, 1.45-1.86) through 2013 (1.67; 95% CI, 1.55-1.8) and increased in 2014 (1.99; 95% CI, 1.85-2.13) and 2015 (2.47; 95% CI, 2.31-2.62). The proportion of femoral periprosthetic fractures managed with total knee arthroplasty revision remained stable (P_trend = .97) with an increase in total hip arthroplasty (THA) revision (P_trend < .001) and concurrent decrease in open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) (P_trend < .001). Revision THA was significantly more costly than revision total knee arthroplasty (P = .004), and both were significantly more costly than ORIF (P < .001 for both).ConclusionThe annual incidence of periprosthetic fractures remained relatively stable throughout our study period. The proportion of periprosthetic fractures managed with revision THA increased, whereas ORIF decreased. Our findings are encouraging considering the significant burden an increase in periprosthetic fracture incidence would present to the health care system in terms of both expense and patient morbidity.     

Proximal Femoral Replacement in the Management of Acute Periprosthetic Fractures of the Hip: A Competing Risks Survival Analysis

To examine the mortality and implant survivorship of proximal femoral replacement (PFR), revision total hip arthroplasty (REV) and open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) in the treatment of acute periprosthetic fractures of the proximal femur, we retrospectively reviewed 97 consecutive acute periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures from 2000 to 2010. Three groups were defined: PFR (n = 21), REV (n = 19), and ORIF (n = 57). Outcome measures were all-cause mortality, implant failure, and reoperation. Competing Risks survival analysis of overall mortality during the mean 35-month follow-up showed no statistical difference between the three groups (P = 0.65; 12 and 60 month mortality for PFR: 37%, 45%; REV: 16%, 46%; ORIF: 14%, 100%). Implant survival was worse for the PFR group (P = 0.03, 12 and 60-month implant failure rate for PFR: 5%, 39%; REV: 7%, 7%; ORIF 2%, 2%). We conclude that PFR as compared with REV or ORIF may have worse medium-term implant survival, primarily due to instability and dislocation.     

Factors associated with failure of fixation of Vancouver B fractures around a cemented polished tapered stem: A 5 to 14 year follow up study

AimsThere is increasing evidence for fixation as opposed to revision for Vancouver B fractures around polished taper slip stems, however it is remains unclear whether fixation is associated with stem loosening in the longer term. This study aims to assess survival of plate-fixation of Vancouver-B-fractures around a polished-taper- slip cemented stem and identify factors associated with failure.MethodsRetrospective cohort study assessed 129 consecutive unilateral Vancouver-B-fractures around cemented Exeter stems at a minimum of 5 years following open-reduction-internal-fixation (ORIF) with unilateral non-locked unilateral plating+/-cerclage cables. The primary outcome measure was reoperation for any reason. Kaplan Meier survival analysis was performed.ResultsFractures (B1 n = 31 (24%); B2 n = 91 (71%); and B3 n = 7 (5%)) occurred at median of 6 years (IQR 1.2–9.2) after primary surgery. Mean patient age was 78.2 (SD10.56, range 46–96) and 54 (42.9%) were female. Mean follow up was 8.7 years (SD 2.48, 5.7 to 14.4). Symptomatic femoral stem loosening requiring revision occurred in two B2 fractures of metaphyseal split and short spiral patterns. The most common mode of failure was non-union (n = 7, 5%). Both fixation failure (n = 6/31 Vs n = 3/91 vs n = 0/7, p = 0.008) and reoperation (n = 8/31 vs n = 6/91 vs n = 0/7, p = 0.008) were significantly higher following fixation of B1 fractures compared to B2 and B3 fractures. Overall 5year survival free from reoperation was 88.8% (82.0–94.7 95%CI). B1 fracture types were associated with an increase risk of failure (endpoints fixation failure p = 0.010; and reoperation p = 0.016). Transverse fractures (B1) were associated with a relative risk of reoperation of 4.22 (1.63–10.9 95% CI, p = 0.008).ConclusionFixation of Vancouver-B fractures around cemented Exeter stems, when the bone-cement interface is intact and the fracture is anatomically reducible, had an excellent 5-year survival. Only 2 (1.6%) cases of late femoral stem loosening occurred, however, B1 type transverse fractures were associated with a higher rate of reoperation.     

A unique peri-prosthetic fracture pattern in well fixed femoral stems with polished, tapered, collarless design of total hip replacement

Peri-prosthetic fractures (PPF) are a recognised complication following hip arthroplasty. Prosthesis design and type influence PPF pattern. Surgeons rely on classification systems, such as the Vancouver, to aid treatment planning. This study highlights a specific fracture pattern that occurs with cemented well-fixed polished, tapered, collarless (PTC) stems. We reviewed a consecutive series of 21 PPF around well fixed PTC stems. The majority of the fractures were classified pre-operatively as Vancouver B2 (14/21), but there were also B1 (6/21) and A type fractures. The B2 fractures had common radiological and intra-operative findings: a spiral fracture with extensive fragmentation of bone and cement, debonding of cement from the implant, cement fracture, and a well-fixed cement-bone interface. Reconstruction of these fractures was more difficult than suggested by the radiographs. Two of the six patients who were considered to have a Vancouver B1 fracture underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), and had treatment-related complications. Retrospective review of the radiographs showed subtle features, such as subsidence of the stem into the centraliser, that are characteristic of a B2 fracture pattern. In summary, it is important to recognise this fracture pattern around secure PTC stems in order to prevent misinterpretation of the fracture as a Vancouver B1 rather than a B2, leading to failure of treatment, and to alert the surgeon that complex reconstruction will be required because of the extensive fragmentation.     

Predictors of Perioperative Vancouver B Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Associated With the Direct Anterior Approach to Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundThere is an association between intraoperative and postoperative femoral fractures and the direct anterior approach (DAA) to total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of our study is to identify risk factors for Vancouver B fractures and to establish a predictable timeline for when these occur.MethodsWe retrospectively identified patients with Vancouver B periprosthetic femoral fractures (n = 49) after 11,509 elective primary cementless THA procedures through the DAA between 2012 and 2018 at a single institution. Fracture patients were matched to nonfracture patients (n = 267) by date of surgery and surgeon. Clinical and radiographic factors were collected for multivariable analysis to identify predictors of fracture.ResultsPeriprosthetic Vancouver B femoral fracture incidence was 0.4%. 48 (98%) fractures were postoperative. Fractures occurred at an average of 44 days after surgery (range: 1 to 653 days) with >85% of fractures occurring in the first 6 weeks postoperatively. Significant variables predictive of fracture included >3 degrees valgus and >5 degrees varus coronal stem malalignment, Dorr B and C femoral geometry, lower canal flare index (2.75 vs 3.20), advanced age, increased comorbidities, greater stem canal fill, and right-sided procedures.ConclusionDespite an overall low rate of Vancouver B perioperative periprosthetic femoral fractures, it is a devastating complication that typically presents within the first 6 weeks after DAA THA surgery. The risk is increased in patients with unfavorable proximal femoral geometry, coronal stem malalignment, advanced age, increased comorbidities, and right-sided procedures.     

Open reduction internal fixation vs. reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of acute displaced proximal humerus fractures

BackgroundProximal humerus fractures are a frequent fragility fracture in the aging population and represent a challenge to the orthopedic surgeon. Open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of these fractures is viable but technically challenging and associated with a high complication rate. Recently, reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) with tuberosity repair has become a popular and successful option for treating these fractures. The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes of ORIF and RTSA for treatment of proximal humerus fractures.MethodsAn age-matched group of 50 patients treated with ORIF (25) and RTSA (25) were assessed at an average follow-up of 4.4 years. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES) and Simple Shoulder Test (SST), radiographs, range of motion, and complications were evaluated between the two groups.ResultsThe reoperation rate and major complications were higher in the ORIF group compared to RTSA. No major complications were observed in the RTSA group. Forward flexion in the RTSA patients (143.2 ± 23.1) was shown to be significantly greater than ORIF patients (121.4 ± 35.1) (p= 0.0125) but no significant differences were observed for shoulder external rotation or internal rotation. There was no difference in ASES and SST scores between groups.ConclusionThe current study demonstrates good clinical outcomes for both RTSA and ORIF. However, reoperation rate was higher with ORIF with locked plating compared to RTSA for fracture with tuberosity repair in an age matched population. RTSA may be a better treatment option than ORIF for 3- and 4-part fractures in patients older than 65.Level of evidenceLevel III     

Hospital and Surgeon Reimbursement Trends for Femoral Neck Fractures Treated With Hip Hemiarthroplasty and Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundThe economic impact of hip fractures on the health care system continues to rise with continued pressure to reduce unnecessary costs while maintaining quality patient care. This study aimed to analyze the trend in hospital charges and payments relative to surgeon charges and payments in a Medicare population for hip hemiarthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty (THA) for femoral neck fracture.MethodsThe 5% Medicare sample database was used to capture hospital and surgeon charges and payments related to 32,340 patients who underwent hemiarthroplasty and 4323 patients who underwent THA for femoral neck fractures between 2005 and 2014. Two values were calculated: (1) charge multiplier (CM, ratio of hospital to surgeon charges), and (2) payment multiplier (PM, ratio of hospital to surgeon payments). Year-to-year variation and regional trends in patient demographics, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), length of stay (LOS), 90-day and 1-year mortality, CM, and PM were evaluated.ResultsHospital charges were significantly higher than surgeon charges and increased substantially for hemiarthroplasty (CM of 13.6 to 19.3, P < .0001) and THA (CM of 9.8 to 14.9, P = .0006). PM followed a similar trend for both hemiarthroplasty (14.9 to 20.2; P = .001) and THA (11.9 to 17.4; P < .0001). LOS decreased significantly for hemiarthroplasty (3.78 to 3.37d; P < .0001) despite increasing CCI (6.36 to 8.39; P = .018), whereas both LOS (3.71 to 3.79 days; P = .421) and CCI (5.34 to 7.08; P = .055) remained unchanged for THA.ConclusionHospital charges and payments relative to surgeon charges and payments have increased substantially for hemiarthroplasty and THA performed for femoral neck fractures.     

Mortality and Complications Following Early Conversion Arthroplasty for Failed Hip Fracture Surgery

BackgroundHip fracture in older patients leads to high morbidity and mortality. Patients who are treated surgically but fail acutely face a more complex operation with conversion total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study investigated mortalities and complications in patients who experienced failure within one year following hip fracture surgery requiring conversion THA.MethodsPatients aged 60 years or more undergoing conversion THA within one year following intertrochanteric or femoral neck fracture were identified and propensity-matched to patients sustaining hip fractures treated surgically but not requiring conversion within the first year. Patients who had two-year follow-up (91 conversions; 247 comparisons) were analyzed for 6-month, 12-month, and 24-month mortalities, 90-day readmissions, surgical complications, and medical complications.ResultsNonunion and screw cutout were the most common indications for conversion THA. Mortalities were similar between groups at 6 months (7.7% conversion versus 6.1% nonconversion, P = .774), 12 months (11% conversion versus 12% nonconversion, P = .999), and 24 months (14% conversion versus 22% nonconversion, P = .163). Survivorships were similar between groups for the entire cohort and by fracture type. Conversion THA had a higher rate of 90-day readmissions (14% versus 3.2%, P = .001), and medical complications (17% versus 6.1%, P = .006). Inpatient and 90-day orthopaedic complications were similar.ConclusionConversion THA for failed hip fracture surgery had comparable mortality rates to hip fracture surgery, with higher rates of perioperative medical complications and readmissions. Conversion THA following hip fracture represents a potential “second hit” that both surgeons and patients should be aware of with initial decision-making.     

Periprosthetic Tibial Fractures After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Early and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes

BackgroundAlthough periprosthetic fractures are increasing in prevalence, evidence-based guidelines for the optimal treatment of periprosthetic tibial fractures (PTx) are lacking. Thus, the purpose of this study is to assess the clinical outcomes in PTx after a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) which were treated with different treatment options.MethodsA retrospective review was performed on a consecutive series of 34 nontumor patients treated at 2 academic institutions who experienced a PTx after TKA (2008-2016). Felix classification was used to classify fractures (Felix = I-II-III; subgroup = A-B-C) which were treated by closed reduction, open reduction/internal fixation, revision TKA, or proximal tibial replacement. Patient demographics and surgical characteristics were collected. Failure of treatment was defined as any revision or reoperation. Independent t-tests, one-way analysis of variance, chi-squared analyses, and Fisher’s exact tests were conducted.ResultsPatients with Felix I had more nonsurgical complications when compared to Felix III patients (P = .006). Felix I group developed more postoperative anemia requiring transfusion than Felix III group (P = .009). All fracture types had >30% revision and >50% readmission rate with infection being the most common cause. These did not differ between Felix fracture types. Patients who underwent proximal tibial replacement had higher rate of postoperative infection (P = .030), revision surgery (P = .046), and required more flap reconstructions (P = .005).ConclusionPTx after a TKA is associated with high revision and readmission rates. Patients with Felix type I fractures are at higher risk of postoperative nonsurgical complications and anemia requiring transfusion. Fractures treated with proximal tibial replacement are more likely to develop postoperative infections and undergo revision surgery.     

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.     

Open versus closed pilon fractures: Comparison of management,outcomes, and complications

BackgroundDespite the low incidence of pilon fractures amongst lower limb injuries, their high impact nature presents difficulties in surgical management and recovery. The high complication rate and long recovery times presents a challenge for surgeons and patients. Current literature is varied, with no universal treatment algorithm. We aim to highlight differences in outcomes and complications between open and closed pilon fractures, and between patients treated by open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) or fine wire fixator (FWF) for open and closed fracture subgroups.MethodsThis retrospective study was conducted at a major trauma centre including 135 patients over a 6-year period. Primary outcome was AOFAS score at 3, 6, and 12-months post-injury. Secondary outcomes included time to partial weight-bear (PWB) and full weight-bear (FWB), bone union time, and complications during the follow-up time. AO/OTA classification was used (43A: n = 23, 43B: n = 30, 43C: n = 82). Interobserver agreement was high for bone union time (kappa=0.882) and AO/OTA class (kappa=0.807).ResultsHigher AOFAS scores were seen in ORIF groups of both open and closed fractures, compared to FWF groups. The difference was not statistically significant apart from 12-month AOFAS score of 43C open fractures (p = 0.003) and in 43B closed fractures 3 and 6 months post-injury (p<0.001 and p<0.001, respectively). The majority of ORIF subgroups, open and closed fractures, also had shorter time to PWB, FWB, time to union, and follow-up. Statistically significant differences were seen in the following cases: ORIF-treated 43B closed fracture subgroup had shorter time to PWB and FWB (p<0.001 and p = 0.017, respectively), ORIF-treated 43C closed fractures had shorter time to union (p = 0.005). Common complications for open fractures were non-union (24%), post-traumatic arthritis (16%); for closed fractures they were post-traumatic arthritis (24%), superficial infection (21%). All occurred more frequently in FWF-treated patients.ConclusionMost ORIF-treated subgroups in either open or closed pilon fractures showed better primary and secondary outcomes than FWF-treated subgroups, yet few were statistically significant. Overall, our use of a two-staged approach involving temporary external fixation, followed with ORIF or FWF achieved low complication rates and good functional recovery.