Treatment of Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures with the Bicontact Revision Stem

Abstract

Purpose: Periprosthetic fractures in cases without prior loosening of the stem can be treated with open reduction and internal fixation, but cases with preexisting loosening and/or bone defects present specific challenges to the surgeon. The keys to the success of intramedullary stabilization of femoral fractures - reconstruction of length, axis and rotation rather than meticulous reduction of the fragments and minimal impact on fragment vascularization by the surgical approach - can be transferred to the treatment of periprosthetic fractures. Method: The Bicontact revision stem can be regarded as a combination of an interlocking nail in its distal part and a proximally coated femoral stem in its proximal part. The transfemoral approach respects the vascularization of the bone, although it is not minimally invasive. Forty-one patients with a mean age of 72.3 years and a periprosthetic fracture were included in this study. According to the Vancouver classification there were 2 type A fractures of the trochanteric region, 14 were B1, 8 were B2 with prior loosening, 13 were B3 with significant bone loss, and 2 fractures were distal to the tip of the prosthesis (type C). Results: In all patients, intramedullary stabilization with a Bicontact revision stem was performed. All but three fractures healed (pathologic fracture with multiple myeloma in one case, impaired bone healing in two cases). In 7 patients, further procedures had to be undertaken (new periprosthetic fracture in 2, loosening and revision with a standard prosthesis in 2, revision with a long stem prosthesis together with bone grafting in 3 cases). At follow-up, after a mean of 4.3 years, all patients were able to walk, and the mean Harris Hip Score was 71.1 points. Conclusion: In conclusion, combined application of the principles of intramedullary nailing and of uncemented total hip replacement by use of the distally interlocked Bicontact revision stem enables successful treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures.

Key words

total hip replacement - periprosthetic fracture - intramedullary nailing - interlocking - femoral revision

References

• 1 Beals R K, Tower S S. Periprosthetic fractures of the femur. An analysis of 93 fractures.  Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;  327 238-246
• 2 Berend K R, Lombardi Jr A V, Mallory T H, Chonko D J, Dodds K L, Adams J B. Cerclage wires or cables for the management of intraoperative fracture associated with a cementless, tapered femoral prosthesis: results at 2 to 16 years.  J Arthroplasty. 2004;  19 17-21
• 3 Bethea J S, DeAndrade J R, Fleming L L, Lindenbaum S D, Welch R B. Proximal femur fractures following total hip arthroplasty.  Clin Orthop. 1982;  170 95-106
• 4 Böhm P, Bischel O. Femoral revision with the Wagner SL revision stem: evaluation of one hundred and twenty-nine revisions followed for a mean of 4.8 years.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 2001;  83 1023-1031
• 5 Cameron H U. Intraoperative hip fractures: ruining your day.  J Arthroplasty. 2004;  19 99-103
• 6 Duncan C P, Masri B A. Fractures of the femur after hip replacement.  Instr Course Lect. 1995;  44 293-304
• 7 Eingartner C, Heigele T, Volkmann R, Weise K. Long term results of an uncemented straight femoral shaft prosthesis.  Hip International. 2006;  16 23-32
• 8 Eingartner C, Volkmann R, Ochs U, Egetemeyr D, Weise K. lntramedullary stabilization of periprosthetic fractures of the femur taking special account of bone defects.  Operat Orthop Traumatol. 2006;  18 341-363
• 9 Eingartner C, Volkmann R, Winter E, Weise K, Weller S. A long straight stem with distal interlocking for uncemented stem revision in THR. Szabo Z, Lewis JE, Fantini GA, Savalgi RS Surgical Technology International. San Francisco; Universal Medical Press 2000: 273-279
• 10 Gruner A, Hockertz T, Reilmann H. Periprosthetic fractures: classification, management, therapy.  Unfallchirurg. 2004;  107 35-49
• 11 Incavo S J, Beard D M, Pupparo F, Ries M, Wiedel J. One-stage revision of periprosthetic fractures around loose cemented total hip arthroplasty.  Am J Orthop. 1998;  27 35-41
• 12 Johansson J E, McBroom R, Barrington T W, Hunter G A. Fracture of the ipsilateral femur in patients with total hip replacement.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1981;  63 1435-1442
• 13 Jukkala-Partio K, Partio E K, Solovieva S, Paavilainen T, Hirvensalo E, Alho A. Treatment of periprosthetic fractures in association with total hip arthroplasty - a retrospective comparison between revision stem and plate fixation.  Ann Chir Gynaecol. 1998;  87 229-235
• 14 Kaab M J, Stockle U, Schutz M, Stefansky J, Perka C, Haas N P. Stabilisation of periprosthetic fractures with angular stable internal fixation: a report of 13 cases.  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2006;  126 105-110
• 15 Klein G R, Parvizi J, Rapuri V, Wolf C F, Hozack W J, Sharkey P F, Purtill J J. Proximal femoral replacement for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 2005;  87 1777-1781
• 16 Lindahl H, Malchau H, Oden A, Garellick G. Risk factors for failure after treatment of a periprosthetic fracture of the femur.  J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 2006;  88 26-30
• 17 Mennen U. Mennen plate fixation for the treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 2003;  85 2248-2249
• 18 Mont M A, Maar D C. Fractures of the ipsilateral femur after hip arthroplasty. A statistical analysis of outcome based on 487 patients.  J Arthroplasty. 1994;  9 511-519
• 19 Ochs U, Volkmann R, Eingartner C. Treatment of large femoral bone defects - 15-year experiences with the cementless Bicontact revision stem with distal interlocking.  Z Orthop Unfall. 2007;  145 (Suppl 1) S34-S39
• 20 Probst A, Schneider T, Hankemeier S, Brug E. The prosthesis nail - a new stable fixation device for periprosthetic fractures and critical fractures of the proximal femur.  Unfallchirurg. 2003;  106 722-731
• 21 Sarvilinna R, Huhtala H S, Puolakka T J, Nevalainen J K, Pajamaki K J. Periprosthetic fractures in total hip arthroplasty: an epidemiologic study.  Int Orthop. 2003;  27 359-361
• 22 Sarvilinna R, Huhtala H S, Sovelius R T, Halonen P J, Nevalainen J K, Pajamaki K J. Factors predisposing to periprosthetic fracture after hip arthroplasty: a case (n = 31) control study.  Acta Orthop Scand. 2004;  75 16-20
• 23 Schuh A, Werber S, Holzwarth U, Zeiler G. Cementless modular hip revision arthroplasty using the MRP Titan Revision Stem: outcome of 79 hips after an average of 4 years' follow-up.  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2004;  124 306-309
• 24 Shah N, McCabe J. Dall-Miles cable and plate system for periprosthetic femoral fracture.  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2002;  12 137-139
• 25 Siegmeth A, Menth-Chiari W, Wozasek G E, Vecsei V. Periprosthetic femur shaft fracture. Indications and outcome in 51 patients.  Unfallchirurg. 1998;  101 901-906
• 26 Somers J F, Suy R, Stuyck J, Mulier M, Fabry G. Conservative treatment of femoral shaft fractures in patients with total hip arthroplasty.  J Arthroplasty. 1998;  13 162-171
• 27 Springer B D, Berry D J, Lewallen D G. Treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures following total hip arthroplasty with femoral component revision.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 2003;  85 2156-2162
• 28 Volkmann R, Bretschneider C, Eingartner C, Weller S. Revision arthroplasty - femoral aspect: the concept to solve high grade defects.  Int Orthop. 2003;  27 (Suppl 1) S24-S29
• 29 Wagner H. [A revision prosthesis for the hip joint] Revisionsprothese für das Hüftgelenk.  Orthopäde. 1989;  18 438-453
• 30 Wehrli U. [Wagner revision of prosthesis stem] Wagner-Revisionsprothesenschaft.  Z Unfallchir Vers Med. 1991;  84 216-224