Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Has a patient type with peri-prosthetic femoral fractures evolved?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Peri-prosthetic fractures (PPF) have been showing a constant increase. The typical patient described in the SOFCOT symposium in 2005 with PPF was an elderly 77-year-old woman with hip athroplasty (HA). The purpose of this study was to actualize the characteristics of this population. Our hypothesis is that patient type remains a female, but much older, with an equal distribution between HA and knee arthroplasty (KA).

Methods

All cases of PPF were retrospectively gathered during an 18 month period. Besides regular epidemiologic data, we noted autonomy level (Parker, Devane), residence and dependence (Katz), the type of implant, of fracture, the severity of fracture, the onset and the state of solidity of the prosthesis.

Results

The series consisted of 81 patients ( 58 F, 23 M) ( 81 fractures), mean age of 82.2 years; 3.5 % of them were admits from the emergency admits; and 69.1 % lived at home. Parker’s mean score was 4.6, Devane’s mean score was 1.8 and Katz’s mean score was 4.2. There were totals of 46 HA fractures and 39 total knee arthroplasty (TKA) of which four were inter-prosthetic and three were either KA or proximal osteosynthesis. Onset before fracture for HA was 12.1 years, 7.9 years for KA, and 10.2 years for all series. Patients were younger for HA (80.8 years) than for KA (84.1 years). The fracture was mostly noticed in the third proximal (49.4 %), spiral segment (44.5 %) and around the implant, while 34.8 % of loosening was observed for HA versus 7.7 % for KA.

Discussion-conclusion

The patient type has evolved confirming our hypothesis: they are always a female more than 82 years old with a number of fractures on KA similar to that of HA. The patients lived at home, had some autonomy, were somewhat independent in their daily activities but sedentary. Fractures were mostly on the third proximal femur, spiral segment and around the implant. PPF remains rare and a theoretical increase is yet to be confirmed.

Level of evidence : prospective study type IV, cohort study

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bégué T, Thomazeau H et al (2006) Periprosthetic fractures around total hip and knee arthroplasty. Rev Chir Orthop 92(suppl):S29–S96

    Google Scholar 

  2. Delaunay C, Hamadouche M, Girard J, Duhamel A (2013) What are the causes for failures of primary hip arthroplasties in France? Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:3863–3869

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Parker M, Palmer C (1993) A new mobility score for predicting mortality after hip fracture. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 5:797–798

    Google Scholar 

  4. Katz S, Ford AB, Moskowitz RW, Jackson BA, Jaffe MW (1963) Studies of illness in the aged the index of adl : a standardized mesure of biological and psycholsocial function. JAMA 185:914–919

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Devane PA, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH, MacDonald S, Robinson EJ (1995) Measurement of polyethylene wear in metal-backed acetabular cups. II. Clinical evaluation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 319:317–326

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lewallen DG, Berry DJ (1998) Periprosthetic fracture of the femur after total hip arthroplasty : treatment and results to date. Instr Course Lect 47:243–249

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lindhal H, Malchau H, Herberts P, Garellick G (2005) Periprosthetic femoral fractures. Classifications and demographics of 1049 periprosthetic femoral fractures from the Swedish national hip arthroplasty register. J Arthroplasty 20:857–865

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Meek RM, Norwood T, Smith R, Brenkel IJ, Howle CR (2011) The risk of periprosthetic fracture after primary and revision total hip and knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 93:96–101

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bezwada HP, Neubauer P, Baker J, Israelite CL, Johanson NA (2004) Periprosthetic supracondylar femur fractures following total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 19:453–458

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hernigou P, Dupuys N, Delambre J, Guissou I, Poignard A, Allain J, Flouzat-Lachaniette CH (2014) Long, titanium, cemented stems decreased late periprosthetic fractures and revision in patients with severe bone loss and previous revision. Int Orthop 38:2433

  13. 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lehman W, Rupprecht M, Nuechten J, Melzner D, Sellenschloch K, Kolb J, Fenski F, Hoffmann M, Puschel K, Morlock M, Rueger JM (2012) What is the risk of stress risers for interprosthetic fractures of the femur? A biomechanical analysis. Int Orthop 36:2441–2446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Boesmueller S, Michel M, Hofbauer M, Platzer P (2015) Primary cementless hip arthroplasty as a potential risk factor for non-union after long-stem revision arthroplasty in periprosthetic femoral fracture. Int Orthop 39:617-622

  16. Furnes O, Lie SA, Espehaug B, Vollset SE, Engesaeter LB, Havelin LI (2001) Hip disease and the prognosis of total hip replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83:579–586

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ehlinger M, Delaunay C, Karoubi M, Bonnomet F, Ramdane N, Hamadouche M, SoFCOT (2014) Revision of primary total hip arthroplasty for peri-prosthetic fracture : a prospective epidemiological study of 249 consecutive cases in France. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 100:657–662

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Merle d’Aubigné R (1990) Numerical classification of the function of the hip. Rev Chir Orthop 76:371–374

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Delaunay C, Epinette JA, Dawson J, Murray D, Jolles BM (2009) Cross cultural adaptations of the Oxford-12 Hip Score for the French speaking populations. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 95:89–99

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Simon P, Gouin F, Veillard D, Laffargue P, Ehlinger M et al (2008) Femoral neck fractures in patients over 50 years old. Rev Chir Orthop 94S:S108–S132

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors thank Dr Rommel Asagwara, MD, for his excellent contribution to the translation of the manuscript.

Conflict of interest

ME, DB, MR, PA, FB : none for this study

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Service de Chirurgie Orthopédique et de Traumatologie, CHU Hautepierre, Hôpital de Hautepierre, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, 1 Avenue Molière, 67098, Strasbourg Cedex, France

    Matthieu Ehlinger, David Bahlau, Michel Rahme, Philippe Adam & François Bonnomet

Authors
  1. Matthieu Ehlinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Bahlau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michel Rahme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Philippe Adam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. François Bonnomet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthieu Ehlinger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ehlinger, M., Bahlau, D., Rahme, M. et al. Has a patient type with peri-prosthetic femoral fractures evolved?. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 39, 1833–1838 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2873-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2873-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation