Dual Plate Fixation of Periprosthetic Distal Femur Fractures.

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Nicholas A Andring, Shannon M Kaupp, Kaitlin A Henry, Kathryn C Helmig, Sharon Babcock, Jason J Halvorson, Holly T Pilson, Eben A Carroll
{"title":"Dual Plate Fixation of Periprosthetic Distal Femur Fractures.","authors":"Nicholas A Andring, Shannon M Kaupp, Kaitlin A Henry, Kathryn C Helmig, Sharon Babcock, Jason J Halvorson, Holly T Pilson, Eben A Carroll","doi":"10.1097/BOT.0000000000002695","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Dual implants for distal femur periprosthetic fractures is a growing area of interest for these challenging fractures with dual plating (DP) emerging as a viable construct for these injuries. In the current study, an experience with DP constructs is described.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong></p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective case series with comparison group.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Level 1 academic trauma center.</p><p><strong>Patient selection criteria: </strong>Adults >50 years old sustaining comminuted OTA/AO 33-A2 or 33-A3 DFPF treated with either DP or a single distal femur locking plating (DFLP). Patients with simple 33-A1 fractures were excluded. Prior to 2018, patients underwent DFLP after which the treatment of choice became DP.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures and comparisons: </strong>Reoperation rate, alignment, and complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>34 patients treated with DFLP and 38 with DP met inclusion and follow up criteria. Average follow up was 18.2 ± 13.8 months in the DFLP group and 19.8 ± 16.1 months in the DP group ( P = 0.339). The average patient age in the DFLP group was 74.8 ± 7.3 years compared to 75.9 ± 11.3 years in the DP group. There were no statistical differences in demographics, fracture morphology, loss of reduction, or reoperation for any cause ( P >.05). DP patients were more likely to be weight bearing in the twelve-week postoperative period ( P <0.001) and return to their baseline ambulatory status ( P = 0.004) compared to DFLP patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Dual plating of distal femoral periprosthetic fractures maintained coronal alignment with a low reoperation rate even with immediate weight bearing and these patients regained baseline level of ambulation more reliably as compared to patients treated with a single distal femoral locking plate.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":16644,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma","volume":" ","pages":"36-41"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000002695","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Dual implants for distal femur periprosthetic fractures is a growing area of interest for these challenging fractures with dual plating (DP) emerging as a viable construct for these injuries. In the current study, an experience with DP constructs is described.

Methods:

Design: Retrospective case series with comparison group.

Setting: Level 1 academic trauma center.

Patient selection criteria: Adults >50 years old sustaining comminuted OTA/AO 33-A2 or 33-A3 DFPF treated with either DP or a single distal femur locking plating (DFLP). Patients with simple 33-A1 fractures were excluded. Prior to 2018, patients underwent DFLP after which the treatment of choice became DP.

Outcome measures and comparisons: Reoperation rate, alignment, and complications.

Results: 34 patients treated with DFLP and 38 with DP met inclusion and follow up criteria. Average follow up was 18.2 ± 13.8 months in the DFLP group and 19.8 ± 16.1 months in the DP group ( P = 0.339). The average patient age in the DFLP group was 74.8 ± 7.3 years compared to 75.9 ± 11.3 years in the DP group. There were no statistical differences in demographics, fracture morphology, loss of reduction, or reoperation for any cause ( P >.05). DP patients were more likely to be weight bearing in the twelve-week postoperative period ( P <0.001) and return to their baseline ambulatory status ( P = 0.004) compared to DFLP patients.

Conclusions: Dual plating of distal femoral periprosthetic fractures maintained coronal alignment with a low reoperation rate even with immediate weight bearing and these patients regained baseline level of ambulation more reliably as compared to patients treated with a single distal femoral locking plate.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

股骨远端假体周围骨折的双钢板固定术
目的:针对股骨远端假体周围骨折的双植入物越来越受到关注,双钢板(DP)已成为治疗此类骨折的可行结构。本研究介绍了使用 DP 结构的经验:方法:设计:设计:带有对比组的回顾性病例系列:患者选择标准:年龄大于 50 岁的成年人:年龄大于 50 岁的成人,遭受粉碎性 OTA/AO 33-A2 或 33-A3 DFPF,采用 DP 或单一股骨远端锁定钢板 (DFLP) 治疗。单纯 33-A1 骨折患者除外。2018年之前,患者接受DFLP治疗,之后选择DP治疗:再手术率、对位和并发症:34名接受DFLP治疗的患者和38名接受DP治疗的患者符合纳入和随访标准。DFLP组的平均随访时间为(18.2 ± 13.8)个月,DP组为(19.8 ± 16.1)个月(P = 0.339)。DFLP组患者的平均年龄为(74.8 ± 7.3)岁,而DP组患者的平均年龄为(75.9 ± 11.3)岁。两组患者在人口统计学、骨折形态学、复位损失或因任何原因再次手术方面均无统计学差异(P >.05)。DP组患者在术后12周内更有可能负重(P 结论:DP组患者在术后12周内更有可能负重(P 结论:DP组患者在术后12周内更有可能负重):与使用单一股骨远端锁定钢板治疗的患者相比,使用双钢板治疗股骨远端假体周围骨折可保持冠状位对齐,即使立即负重,再手术率也很低,而且这些患者能更可靠地恢复基线活动能力:证据等级:治疗III级。有关证据等级的完整描述,请参阅 "作者须知"。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma 医学-运动科学
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
8.70%
发文量
396
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma is devoted exclusively to the diagnosis and management of hard and soft tissue trauma, including injuries to bone, muscle, ligament, and tendons, as well as spinal cord injuries. Under the guidance of a distinguished international board of editors, the journal provides the most current information on diagnostic techniques, new and improved surgical instruments and procedures, surgical implants and prosthetic devices, bioplastics and biometals; and physical therapy and rehabilitation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信