Management of Garden-I and II Femoral Neck Fractures: Perspectives on Primary Arthroplasty

IF 1.7 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Jon Olansen, Zainab Ibrahim, Roy K Aaron
{"title":"Management of Garden-I and II Femoral Neck Fractures: Perspectives on Primary Arthroplasty","authors":"Jon Olansen, Zainab Ibrahim, Roy K Aaron","doi":"10.2147/ORR.S340535","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This review compares internal fixation versus arthroplasty in the treatment of nondisplaced femoral neck fractures (FNFs) calling attention to evolving areas of consensus that influence clinical decision-making. The Garden classification system, typically dichotomized into nondisplaced (types I and II) and displaced (types III and IV) fractures, has been used as a guide for surgical decision-making. Conventionally, treatment of nondisplaced FNF in the elderly has been with internal fixation, and treatment of a displaced FNF has been hemi-, or more recently total hip, arthroplasty. Studies over the last decade have raised concern over the appropriate treatment of nondisplaced FNFs due to high rates of reoperation of nondisplaced FNFs treated with internal fixation. Avascular necrosis (AVN), failure of internal fixation, secondary malunion, and pin/nail penetration through the femoral head have all been observed. Several studies have attributed fixation failure to a degree of femoral neck tilt ≥20°, either posteriorly or anteriorly as seen on the lateral X-ray. Because of these observations of fixation failures, the suggestion has been made that arthroplasty be used when the degree of posterior tilt exceeds a threshold of ≥20° tilt with the expectation of diminishing failure of fixation, decreasing the risk of reoperation and preserving function without increasing mortality rate. Frustrating additional analyses are uncertainties over the mechanisms of failure of internal fixation with ≥20° tilt and the persistently substantial 1-year mortality rate after FNF, which has not been influenced by fixation or replacement type. Due to the lack of consensus regarding the determination of the appropriate surgical intervention for nondisplaced FNFs, an improved algorithm for surgical decision-making for these fractures may prove useful.","PeriodicalId":19608,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedic Research and Reviews","volume":" 3","pages":"1 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedic Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/ORR.S340535","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This review compares internal fixation versus arthroplasty in the treatment of nondisplaced femoral neck fractures (FNFs) calling attention to evolving areas of consensus that influence clinical decision-making. The Garden classification system, typically dichotomized into nondisplaced (types I and II) and displaced (types III and IV) fractures, has been used as a guide for surgical decision-making. Conventionally, treatment of nondisplaced FNF in the elderly has been with internal fixation, and treatment of a displaced FNF has been hemi-, or more recently total hip, arthroplasty. Studies over the last decade have raised concern over the appropriate treatment of nondisplaced FNFs due to high rates of reoperation of nondisplaced FNFs treated with internal fixation. Avascular necrosis (AVN), failure of internal fixation, secondary malunion, and pin/nail penetration through the femoral head have all been observed. Several studies have attributed fixation failure to a degree of femoral neck tilt ≥20°, either posteriorly or anteriorly as seen on the lateral X-ray. Because of these observations of fixation failures, the suggestion has been made that arthroplasty be used when the degree of posterior tilt exceeds a threshold of ≥20° tilt with the expectation of diminishing failure of fixation, decreasing the risk of reoperation and preserving function without increasing mortality rate. Frustrating additional analyses are uncertainties over the mechanisms of failure of internal fixation with ≥20° tilt and the persistently substantial 1-year mortality rate after FNF, which has not been influenced by fixation or replacement type. Due to the lack of consensus regarding the determination of the appropriate surgical intervention for nondisplaced FNFs, an improved algorithm for surgical decision-making for these fractures may prove useful.
Garden-I 和 II 型股骨颈骨折的处理:初级关节置换术的视角
摘要 本文对治疗无移位股骨颈骨折(FNFs)的内固定术与关节置换术进行了比较,并对影响临床决策的共识领域进行了探讨。Garden分类系统通常将骨折分为无移位型(I型和II型)和移位型(III型和IV型),并以此作为手术决策的指南。传统上,治疗老年人非移位性 FNF 的方法是内固定,而治疗移位性 FNF 的方法是半髋关节置换术,最近则是全髋关节置换术。过去十年的研究表明,由于采用内固定治疗的非移位 FNF 的再手术率很高,因此人们对非移位 FNF 的适当治疗方法表示担忧。血管性坏死 (AVN)、内固定失败、继发性骨不连以及针/钉穿透股骨头的情况均有发生。有几项研究将固定失败归因于股骨颈后倾或前倾≥20°,如侧位X光片所示。由于这些固定失败的观察结果,有人建议,当股骨颈后倾程度超过≥20°的阈值时,就应使用关节置换术,以减少固定失败,降低再次手术的风险,并在不增加死亡率的情况下保护功能。其他分析令人沮丧的是,倾斜度≥20°的内固定失败机制尚不确定,而且 FNF 术后 1 年死亡率一直居高不下,固定或置换类型对其影响不大。由于在确定非置换性 FNF 的适当手术干预方面缺乏共识,因此针对此类骨折的手术决策改进算法可能会被证明是有用的。
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
Orthopedic Research and Reviews
Orthopedic Research and Reviews Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopedic Research and Reviews is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal focusing on the patho-physiology of the musculoskeletal system, trauma, surgery and other corrective interventions to restore mobility and function. Advances in new technologies, materials, techniques and pharmacological agents will be particularly welcome. Specific topics covered in the journal include: Patho-physiology and bioengineering, Technologies and materials science, Surgical techniques, including robotics, Trauma management and care, Treatment including pharmacological and non-pharmacological, Rehabilitation and Multidisciplinarian care approaches, Patient quality of life, satisfaction and preference, Health economic evaluations. The journal welcomes submitted papers covering original research, basic science and technology, clinical studies, reviews and evaluations, guidelines, expert opinion and commentary, case reports and extended reports.
×
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