Cemented vs cementless stems for revision arthroplasties due to Vancouver B2 periprosthetic hip fracture

被引:0
|
作者
Lara-Taranchenko, Yuri [1 ]
Nomdedeu Jr, Josep F. [1 ]
Martinez, Andres Aliaga [1 ]
Mimendia, Inaki [1 ]
Barro, Victor M. [1 ]
Collado, Diego [1 ]
Guerra-Farfan, Ernesto [1 ]
Hernandez, Alejandro [1 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Univ Vall dHebron, Pg Vall dHebron 119-129, Barcelona 08035, Spain
关键词
Hip arthroplasty; Hip revision; Periprosthetic fracture; Cemented stem; Cementless stem; FEMORAL FRACTURES;
D O I
10.1007/s00590-024-03961-3
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose According to Vancouver classification, B2 type fractures are most often treated with removal of the loose stem and implantation of a long stem that bypasses the fracture site. However, there is a controversy about the stem fixation that should be used: cemented or cementless. Hence, this study aims to compare cemented and cementless stems in prosthetic revision due to Vancouver B2 (VB2) periprosthetic hip fracture. Methods A retrospective study was done including all the patients treated with stem exchange due to VB2 periprosthetic hip fracture in a tertiary hospital between 2015 and 2022. Patients were divided into two groups according to the stem fixation used: cemented or cementless. Functional outcomes, hospital stay, surgical time, complication rate, and mortality were compared between the two groups of patients. Results Of the 30 included patients, 13 (43.4%) were treated with cementless stems and 17 (56.7%) with cemented stems. There were no statistically significant differences in age, gender, anesthesia risk scale (ASA) or functional capacity prior to the intervention. Patients treated with cementless stems had a higher complication and reintervention rate than those treated with cemented stems: 62 and 45% versus 34 and 6% (p = 0.035; p = 0.010), respectively. Furthermore, in the group of cementless stems a higher proportion of non-union was found (53.8% vs. 17.6%; p = 0.037). Also, the hospital stay (33 vs. 24 days; p = 0.037) and the time to full weight-bearing (21 days vs. 9 days; p < 0.001) were longer in the cementless stem group. Conclusion Cemented fixation in stem revision due to Vancouver B2 periprosthetic hip fracture could be an optimal option with faster recovery which could decrease the rate of complications and reintervention, without compromising the fracture healing and patient mortality. Thus, this option can be considered when an anatomical reduction can be obtained, especially in elderly patients with multiple comorbidities in which a less aggressive surgical option should be considered.
引用
收藏
页码:2573 / 2580
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Treatment algorithm in Vancouver B2 periprosthetic hip fractures: osteosynthesis vs revision arthroplasty
    Gonzalez-Martin, David
    Pais-Brito, Jose Luis
    Gonzalez-Casamayor, Sergio
    Guerra-Ferraz, Ayron
    Ojeda-Jimenez, Jorge
    Herrera-Perez, Mario
    EFORT OPEN REVIEWS, 2022, 7 (08) : 533 - 541
  • [2] Do All Postoperative Vancouver B2 Fractures Require Revision Arthroplasty With Cementless Stems?
    Wilke, Benjamin K.
    Spaulding, Aaron C.
    Crowe, Matthew M.
    Ledford, Cameron K.
    Sherman, Courtney E.
    Spencer-Gardner, Luke
    Blasser, Kurt E.
    ARTHROPLASTY TODAY, 2024, 28
  • [3] Radiologic outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation for cementless stems in Vancouver B2 periprosthetic fractures
    Park, Jong-Seok
    Hong, Sijohn
    Nho, Jae-Hwi
    Kang, Deokwon
    Choi, Hyung-Suk
    Suh, You-Sung
    ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA ET TRAUMATOLOGICA TURCICA, 2019, 53 (01) : 24 - 29
  • [4] Hip Revision Arthroplasty in Periprosthetic Fractures of Vancouver Type B2 and B3
    Fink, Bernd
    Grossmann, Alexandra
    Singer, Joachim
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA, 2012, 26 (04) : 206 - 211
  • [5] Vancouver type B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures treated with revision total hip arthroplasty
    Amenabar, Tomas
    Rahman, Wael A.
    Avhad, Vineet V.
    Vera, Ramiro
    Gross, Allan E.
    Kuzyk, Paul R.
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2015, 39 (10) : 1927 - 1932
  • [6] Vancouver type B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures treated with revision total hip arthroplasty
    Tomas Amenabar
    Wael A. Rahman
    Vineet V. Avhad
    Ramiro Vera
    Allan E. Gross
    Paul R. Kuzyk
    International Orthopaedics, 2015, 39 : 1927 - 1932
  • [7] Stem revision vs. internal fixation in vancouver B2/B3 periprosthetic hip fractures: systematic review and metanalysis
    Di Martino, Alberto
    Brunello, Matteo
    Villari, Eleonora
    D'Agostino, Claudio
    Cosentino, Monica
    Bordini, Barbara
    Rivera, Fabrizio
    Faldini, Cesare
    ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2024, : 3787 - 3796
  • [8] Usefulness of Histology for Predicting Infection at the Time of Hip Revision for the Treatment of Vancouver B2 Periprosthetic Fractures
    Munoz-Mahamud, Ernesto
    Bori, Guillem
    Garcia, Sebastian
    Ramirez, Jose
    Riba, Josep
    Soriano, Alejandro
    JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2013, 28 (08): : 1247 - 1250
  • [9] New Sub-Classification of Vancouver B2 Periprosthetic Hip Fractures According to Fracture Pattern
    Gonzalez-Martin, David
    Pais-Brito, Jose Luis
    Gonzalez-Casamayor, Sergio
    Guerra-Ferraz, Ayron
    Ojeda-Jimenez, Jorge
    Herrera-Perez, Mario
    INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED, 2022, 53 (03): : 1218 - 1224
  • [10] Cementless, Fluted, Long-Stem Hemiarthroplasty for Vancouver B2 and B3 Periprosthetic Fractures Around Hip Hemiarthroplasty
    Lizaur-Utrilla, Alejandro
    Gonzalez-Parreno, Santiago
    Miralles-Munoz, Francisco A.
    Lopez-Prats, Fernando A.
    JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2019, 34 (06): : 1179 - 1183