Advertisement

An unfavourable outcome after periprosthetic fracture following metal-on-metal surface hip arthroplasty

  • H. SharmaEmail author
  • B. Rana
  • E. Noor-Shaari
  • A. Sinha
  • B. J. Singh
  • A. C. Campbell
Case Report
  • 80 Downloads

Abstract

We report a case of a varus malunited periprosthetic femoral neck fracture following metal-on-metal hip resurfacing operation. Failure to closely observe and poor compliance in the young and active group of patients may contribute to such an unfavourable outcome.

Keywords

Femoral neck fractures Metal-on-metal Surface hip arthroplasty Mal-union 

Fracture périprothétique d’une PTH, mauvais résultat

Résumé

Les auteurs rapportent le cas d’une fracture du col fémoral après prothèse métal/métal de resurfaçage, ayant évolué vers un cal vicieux en varus. Le manque de suivi rapproché et de compliance chez les patients jeunes et actifs peut contribuer à cette évolution défavorable.

Mots clés

Fracture du col fémoral Couple métal/métal Prothèse de resurfaçage Cal vicieux 

References

  1. 1.
    Cossey AJ, Back DL, Shimmin A, Young D, Spriggins AJ (2005) The nonoperative management of periprosthetic fractures associated with the Birmingham hip resurfacing procedure. J Arthroplasty 20(3):358–361CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cumming D, Fordyce MJF (2003) Non-operative management of a peri-prosthetic subcapital fracture after metal-on-metal birmingham hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 85-B:1055–1056Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Smet KA, Pattyn C, Verdonk R (2002) Early results of primary Birmingham hip resurfacing using a hybrid metal-on-metal couple. Hip Int 12(2):158–162Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ebied A, Journeaux S (2002) Metal on metal hip resurfacing. Curr Orthop 16:420–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hedley AK (1981) Complications of surface replacements. Instr Course Lect 30:444–454PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McMinn D, Treacy R, Lin K, Pynsent P (1996) Metal on metal surface replacement of the hip. Experience of the McMinn prothesis. Clin Orthop 329(Suppl):S89–S98CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mont MA, Rajadhyaksha AD, Hungerford DS (2001) Outcomes of limited femoral resurfacing arthroplasty compared with total hip arthroplasty for osteonecrosis of the femoral head. J Arthroplasty 16(8 Suppl 1):134–139CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Murray WR, Van Meter JW (1982) Surface replacement hip arthroplasty: results of the first seventy-four consecutive cases at the University of California, San Francisco. Hip 156–166Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schmalzried TP, Fowble VA, Ure KJ, Amstutz HC (1996) Metal on metal surface replacement of the hip. Technique, fixation, and early results. Clin Orthop 329(Suppl):S106–S114CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Sharma
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • B. Rana
    • 1
  • E. Noor-Shaari
    • 1
  • A. Sinha
    • 1
  • B. J. Singh
    • 1
  • A. C. Campbell
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Trauma and OrthopaedicsMonklands HospitalAirdrieUK
  2. 2.Newton MearnsUK

Personalised recommendations