Treatment of Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Vancouver Type B2: Revision Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation With Locking Compression Plate
Introduction: The Vancouver algorithm recommends revision arthroplasty (RA) for Vancouver type B2 (VTB2) fractures. However, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using locking compression plates (LCP) may be a valid and less invasive alternative treatment. Materials and Methods: Between Janua...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SAGE Publishing
2019-09-01
|
| Series: | Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & Rehabilitation |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1177/2151459319876859 |
| _version_ | 1818535232720076800 |
|---|---|
| author | C. Baum MD M. Leimbacher MD P. Kriechling MD A. Platz MD D. Cadosch MD, PhD |
| author_facet | C. Baum MD M. Leimbacher MD P. Kriechling MD A. Platz MD D. Cadosch MD, PhD |
| author_sort | C. Baum MD |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction: The Vancouver algorithm recommends revision arthroplasty (RA) for Vancouver type B2 (VTB2) fractures. However, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using locking compression plates (LCP) may be a valid and less invasive alternative treatment. Materials and Methods: Between January 2007 and March 2017, we retrospectively recruited all patients treated with either ORIF with LCP or RA for VTB2 fractures in our clinic. All of the following were reviewed: the length of hospital stay, the operating time, the need for blood transfusions during and/or after surgery, implant-related and patient-related complications, need for revision surgery, and the radiological outcome. Additionally, the functional outcome was investigated. Results: Fifty-nine patients were recruited. Thirty-five (59.3%) patients underwent RA, while 24 (40.7%) patients received ORIF with LCP. The median surgical time was 137.50 minutes in the LCP group compared to 160.00 minutes in the RA group ( P = .051). Three (12.5%) patients in the LCP group and 10 (28.6%) patients in the RA group experienced an implant-associated complication ( P = .131). Patient-related complications occurred in 3 (12.5%) patients in the LCP group versus 6 (17.1%) patients in the RA group ( P = .628). The mean preoperative Parker mobility score was 9 points in both groups and decreased in both groups to a mean of 5 points in the LCP and 7 points in the RA group. Discussion: Open reduction and internal fixation with LCP seems to be a less invasive procedure for VTB2 fractures in comparison to RA. It is a bone-sparing procedure that can be advantageous for further revision operations. Moreover, some fractures can only be anatomically reduced by ORIF with LCP, whereas for proximal fractures with a radiologically unambiguously loosened stem RA might be advantageous. Conclusion: In line with previously published studies, our data suggest that ORIF using LCP is a valid treatment option for VTB2 fractures. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-11T18:22:05Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-00e3eeccd6f343e9a55dc23dea31656f |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2151-4593 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-11T18:22:05Z |
| publishDate | 2019-09-01 |
| publisher | SAGE Publishing |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & Rehabilitation |
| spelling | doaj.art-00e3eeccd6f343e9a55dc23dea31656f2022-12-22T00:55:12ZengSAGE PublishingGeriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & Rehabilitation2151-45932019-09-011010.1177/2151459319876859Treatment of Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Vancouver Type B2: Revision Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation With Locking Compression PlateC. Baum MD0M. Leimbacher MD1P. Kriechling MD2A. Platz MD3D. Cadosch MD, PhD4 Department of General, Hand and Trauma Surgery, Triemli Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland Department of General, Hand and Trauma Surgery, Triemli Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland Department of General, Hand and Trauma Surgery, Triemli Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland Department of General, Hand and Trauma Surgery, Triemli Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland Department of General, Hand and Trauma Surgery, Triemli Hospital Zurich, Zurich, SwitzerlandIntroduction: The Vancouver algorithm recommends revision arthroplasty (RA) for Vancouver type B2 (VTB2) fractures. However, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using locking compression plates (LCP) may be a valid and less invasive alternative treatment. Materials and Methods: Between January 2007 and March 2017, we retrospectively recruited all patients treated with either ORIF with LCP or RA for VTB2 fractures in our clinic. All of the following were reviewed: the length of hospital stay, the operating time, the need for blood transfusions during and/or after surgery, implant-related and patient-related complications, need for revision surgery, and the radiological outcome. Additionally, the functional outcome was investigated. Results: Fifty-nine patients were recruited. Thirty-five (59.3%) patients underwent RA, while 24 (40.7%) patients received ORIF with LCP. The median surgical time was 137.50 minutes in the LCP group compared to 160.00 minutes in the RA group ( P = .051). Three (12.5%) patients in the LCP group and 10 (28.6%) patients in the RA group experienced an implant-associated complication ( P = .131). Patient-related complications occurred in 3 (12.5%) patients in the LCP group versus 6 (17.1%) patients in the RA group ( P = .628). The mean preoperative Parker mobility score was 9 points in both groups and decreased in both groups to a mean of 5 points in the LCP and 7 points in the RA group. Discussion: Open reduction and internal fixation with LCP seems to be a less invasive procedure for VTB2 fractures in comparison to RA. It is a bone-sparing procedure that can be advantageous for further revision operations. Moreover, some fractures can only be anatomically reduced by ORIF with LCP, whereas for proximal fractures with a radiologically unambiguously loosened stem RA might be advantageous. Conclusion: In line with previously published studies, our data suggest that ORIF using LCP is a valid treatment option for VTB2 fractures.https://doi.org/10.1177/2151459319876859 |
| spellingShingle | C. Baum MD M. Leimbacher MD P. Kriechling MD A. Platz MD D. Cadosch MD, PhD Treatment of Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Vancouver Type B2: Revision Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation With Locking Compression Plate Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & Rehabilitation |
| title | Treatment of Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Vancouver Type B2: Revision Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation With Locking Compression Plate |
| title_full | Treatment of Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Vancouver Type B2: Revision Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation With Locking Compression Plate |
| title_fullStr | Treatment of Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Vancouver Type B2: Revision Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation With Locking Compression Plate |
| title_full_unstemmed | Treatment of Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Vancouver Type B2: Revision Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation With Locking Compression Plate |
| title_short | Treatment of Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Vancouver Type B2: Revision Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation With Locking Compression Plate |
| title_sort | treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures vancouver type b2 revision arthroplasty versus open reduction and internal fixation with locking compression plate |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1177/2151459319876859 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT cbaummd treatmentofperiprostheticfemoralfracturesvancouvertypeb2revisionarthroplastyversusopenreductionandinternalfixationwithlockingcompressionplate AT mleimbachermd treatmentofperiprostheticfemoralfracturesvancouvertypeb2revisionarthroplastyversusopenreductionandinternalfixationwithlockingcompressionplate AT pkriechlingmd treatmentofperiprostheticfemoralfracturesvancouvertypeb2revisionarthroplastyversusopenreductionandinternalfixationwithlockingcompressionplate AT aplatzmd treatmentofperiprostheticfemoralfracturesvancouvertypeb2revisionarthroplastyversusopenreductionandinternalfixationwithlockingcompressionplate AT dcadoschmdphd treatmentofperiprostheticfemoralfracturesvancouvertypeb2revisionarthroplastyversusopenreductionandinternalfixationwithlockingcompressionplate |