Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Is internal fixation using a reversed condylar locking plate useful for treating Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Orthopaedics and Traumatology

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study is to investigate clinical result and complication with locking compression plate-distal femur (LCP-DF) for Vancouver type B periprosthetic fracture and compared to standard conventional locking plate.

Patients and methods

Twelve patients treated using reversed LCP-DF were compared with 12 treated using broad LCP. As radiographic evaluation, the period of bone union, and the numbers of screws and cables that were used with each plate were compared between the two groups. The complications, operation time, blood loss, and clinical assessment were investigated.

Results

The number of locking screws that could be inserted into the proximal fragment was 5.83 (4–8) in the LCP-DF group and 2.25 (1–4) in the Broad LCP group, being significantly greater in the former (p = 0.00003). Post-operative complications were observed in two patients, of whom one in the broad LCP group showed delayed healing after reduction loss, and the other in the LCP-DF group showed skin irritation symptoms in the plate application area. There was no significant difference in the mean operation times (p = 0.81), the mean blood losses (p = 0.47), and the walking ability (p = 0.95) between the two groups.

Conclusions

We showed that higher number of screws was inserted with reversed LCP-DF without any adverse event. This technique is safe with no inferior clinical outcome to standard locking plate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Learmonth ID (2004) Aspects of current management. The management of periprosthetic fractures around the femoral stem. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 86:13–19

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Masri BA, Meek D, Duncan CP (2004) Periprosthetic fractures evaluation and treatment. Clin Orthop 420:80–95

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kavanagh BF (1992) Femoral fracture associated with total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin N Am 23:249–257

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Berry DJ (1999) Epidemiology: hip and knee. Orthop Clin N Am 30:183–190

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Baba T, Shitoto K, Kaneko K, Futamura K, Maruyama Y (2013) Comparison of therapeutic outcomes of periprosthetic femoral fracture between treatments employing locking and conventional plates. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 23:437–441

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gautier E, Sommer C (2003) Guidelines for the clinical application of the LCP. Injury 34:63–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wood GC, Naudie DR, Mcauley J, McCalden RW (2011) Locking compression plates for the treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures around well-fixed total hip and knee implants. J Arthroplasty 26:886–892

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bryant GK, Morshed S, Agel J, Henley MB, Barei DP, Taitsman LA, Nork SE (2009) Isolated locked compression plating for Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic femoral fracture. Injury 40:1180–1186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Apivattakakul T, Phornphutkul C, Bunmaprasert T, Sananpanich K, Fernandez Dell'Oca A (2012) Percutaneous cerclage wiring and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO): a percutaneous reduction technique in the treatment of Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic femoral shaft fractures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 132:813–822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Buttaro MA, Farfalli G, Paredes Núñez M, Comba F, Piccaluga F (2007) Locking compression plate fixation of Vancouver type-B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:1964–1969

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Vallier HA, Hennessey TA, Sontich JK, Patterson BM (2006) Failure of LCP condylar plate fixation in distal part of the femur. A report of six cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:846–853

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Duncan CP, Masri BA (1995) Fracture of the femur after hip replacement. Instr Course Lect 44:293–304

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. d'Aubigné RM, Postel M (1954) Functional result of hip arthroplasty with acrylic prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 36:451–475

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Corten K, Vanrykel F, Bellemans J, Frederix PR, Simon JP, Broos PL (2009) An algorithm for the surgical treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the femur around a well-fixed femoral component. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 91:1424–1430

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Moloney GB, Westrick ER, Siska PA, Tarkin IS (2014) Treatment of periprosthetic femur fractures around a well-fixed hip arthroplasty implant: span the whole bone. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 134:9–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ahuja S, Chatterji S (2002) The Mennen femoral plate for fixation of periprosthetic femoral fractures following hip arthroplasty. Injury 33:47–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Montijo H, Ebert FR, Lennox DA (1989) Treatment of proximal femur fractures associated with total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 4:115–123

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tsiridis E, Haddad FS, Gie GA (2003) Dall-Miles plates for periprosthtic femoral fractures A critical review of 16 cases. Injury 34:107–110

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Demos HA, Briones MS, White PH, Hogan KA, Barfield WR (2012) A biomechanical comparison of periprosthetic femoral fracture fixation in normal and osteoporotic cadaveric bone. J Arthroplasty 27:783–788

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Juntendo University, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan

    Tomonori Baba, Yasuhiro Homma & Kazuo Kaneko

  2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Juntendo University Shizuoka Hospital, Shizuoka, Japan

    Itaru Morohashi

  3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Juntendo University Urayasu Hospital, Chiba, Japan

    Yuichiro Maruyama & Katsuo Shitoto

Authors
  1. Tomonori Baba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yasuhiro Homma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Itaru Morohashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yuichiro Maruyama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Katsuo Shitoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kazuo Kaneko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tomonori Baba.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baba, T., Homma, Y., Morohashi, I. et al. Is internal fixation using a reversed condylar locking plate useful for treating Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures?. Eur Orthop Traumatol 6, 137–143 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12570-015-0295-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12570-015-0295-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation