Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to analyse the incidence of interprosthetic femoral fractures and describe risk factors for them.
Methods
Between 2009 and 2015, we selected patients who were carrying two implants (hip and knee) in the same femur. We collected demographic and clinical data and performed a radiological evaluation to analyse the gap between implants—the femoral canal area and total femoral area—in the axial plane. We defined interprosthetic fracture as that corresponding to a Vancouver type C fracture and types 1 and 2 according to the Su classification.
Results
We studied 68 patients who had total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and 44 patients who had total hip arthroplasty (THA); 24 patients an intramedullary nail. We found six interprosthetic fractures (8.8 %), all in patients with a non-cemented THA. There was a tendency towards statistical difference (p = 0.08). Patients with an additional implant at the proximal femur were statistically less likely to have an interprosthetic fracture (p = 0.04). In radiological results, we found more interprosthetic fractures in patients who had an increased femoral canal area in the axial plane just distal to the tip of the hip implant.
Conclusions
Identifying risk factors for this specific type of fracture may facilitate their prevention. Better implant stability and the presence of a gap between stems in a lower canal zone appear to hinder the occurrence of interprosthetic fractures.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E et al (2007) Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(4):780–785
Berry DJ (1999) Epidemiology: hip and knee. Orthop Clin N Am 30:183–190
Kim KI, Egol KA, Hozack WJ et al (2006) Periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop 446:167–175
Rorabeck CH, Taylor JW (1999) Periprosthetic fractures of the femur complicating total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Clin N Am 30:265–277
Duncan CP, Haddad FS (2014) The unified classification system (UCS): improving ouyr understanding of periprosthetic fractures. Bone Joint J 96-B:713–716
Cook RE, Jenkins PJ, Walmsley PJ et al (2008) Risk factors for periprosthetic fractures of the hip: a survivorship analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466(7):1652–1656
Duncan CP, Masri BA (1995) Fractures of the femur after hip replacement. Instr Course Lect 44:293–304
Su ET, DeWal H, Cesare PE (2004) Periprosthetic femoral fractures above total knee replacement. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 12:12–20
Kenny P, Rice J, Quinlan W (1998) Interprosthetic fracture of the femoral shaft. J Arthroplasty 13:361–364
Sah AP, Marshall A, Virkus WV et al (2010) Interprosthetic fractures of the femur: treatment with a single-locked plate. J Arthroplasty 25:280–286
Platzer P, Schuster R, Luxl M, Widhalm HK, Eipeldauer S, Krusche-Mandl L, Ostermann R, Blutsch B, Vécsei V (2011) Management and outcome of interprosthetic femoral fractures. Injury 42:1219–1225
Lehmann W, Rupprecht M, Hellmers N et al (2010) Biomechanical evaluation of peri- and interprosthetic femoral fractures. J Trauma 68:1459–1463
Iesaka K, Kummer FJ, Di Cesare PE (2005) Stress risers between two ipsilateral intramedullary stems: a finite-element and biomechanical analysis. J Arthroplasty 20:386–391
Harris B, Owen JR, Wayne JS et al (2010) Does femoral component loosening predispose to femoral fracture? An in Vitro comparison of cemented hips. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:497–503
Soenen M, Baracchi M, De Corte R et al (2013) Stemmed TKA in a femur with a total hip arthroplasty. Is there a safe distance between the stem tips? J Arthroplast 28:1437–1445
Mamczak CN, Gardner MJ, Bolhofner B et al (2010) Interprosthetic femoral fractures. J Orthop Trauma 24:740–744
Ebraheim N, Carroll T, Moral MZ et al (2014) Interprosthetic femoral fractures treated with locking plates. Int Orthop 38:2183–2189
Solarino G, Vicenti G, Moretti L et al (2014) Interprosthetic femoral fractures-a challenge of treatment. A systematic review of the literature. Injury 45:362–368
Auston DA, Werner FW, Simpson RB (2015) Orthogonal femoral plating. A biomechanical study with implications for interprosthetic fractures. Bone Joint Res 4:23–28
Lehmann W, Rupprecht M, Nuechtern J et al (2012) What is the risk of stress for interprosthetic fractures of the femur? A biomechanical análisis. Int Orthop 36:2441–2446
Citak M, Klatte TK, Kendoff D et al (2013) Treatment of interprosthetic femoral fractures with an interposition prosthesis. A technical note. Acta Orthop 84(3):326–327
Weiser L, Korecki MA, Sellenschloh K et al (2015) Interposition sleeve as treatment option for interprosthetic fractures of the femur: a biomechanical in vitro assesment. Int Orthop 39(4). doi: 10.1007/s00264-015-2788-5
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Valle Cruz, J.A., Urda, A.L., Serrano, L. et al. Incidence of and risk factors for femoral fractures in the gap between hip and knee implants. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 40, 1697–1702 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2978-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2978-1