header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

What Can We Do With Periprosthetic Fractures?

The International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty (ISTA)



Abstract

Aim

Periprosthetic fractures are usually observed in patients aged over 65 years. The incidence of postoperative periprosthetic femur and tibia fractures is rising with increasing number of hip and knee joint replacements and the increasing life expectancy. The aetiology of periprosthetic fractures is multifactorial. Minimal trauma is causal for the fracture in most cases. Other risk factors are: generalized osteoporosis, loosening of the prosthesis and revision arthroplasty. Our aim is restoration of the patient's pre-fracture functional status.

Method

Between 2004 and 2009 in the Asklepios Orthopedic Clinic Hohwald 118 patients (82 women, 36 men) were operated because of periprosthetic fractures. Mean patient age at surgery was 71 years (range 60-87). The right treatment depends on the location of the fracture and the stability of the implant. Very important is also the quality of bone and the patient's general state of health.

Results

A successful surgical treatment requires a careful preoperative planning. The type of the fracture with or without prostheses instability and with or without bone defect all have influence on the type of patients surgery. Two patients died within one year. There were 2 cases of infection and cases of 5 late healing. Fixation with different plates was used for 67 fractures, at intact and undamaged endoprosthesis was used usually osteosynthesis with “Less Invasive Stabilisation System” plate (LISS, NCB). It combines high primary stability with the biological advantages of a slide-insertion plate osteosynthesis. Retrograde nailing was possible in 5 patients and 8 further with screws and cerclage wiring. In 38 cases we changed the endoprosthesis partially or completely. We reconstructed prosthetic damage or periprosthetic fractures with bone defect using modular prostheses. This system allows a large number of additional components and their combination with cone blocks for reconstruction of severe bone defects.

Conclusion

Periprosthetic fractures have such a range of clinical presentations that they need to be managed on individual basis. The best functional results for stable implants gived internal fixation with a plate. Alternative osteosynthetic techniques and additive minimal osteosynthesis can work better in special cases. Modular prostheses for bone replacement are a method of choice for fractures with extensive bone loss. Nonoperative treatment should only be performed in exceptional cases. Periprosthetic fractures are serious complications because of the mortality and the difficulty in achieving functional recovery after treatment. Our primary aim is remobilization as early as possible-that is the best prevention of secondary complications.


Email: