Revision ratio after Femoral Neck System implantation for hip fracture treatment: a retrospective cohort analysis.

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
L K Aerden, H Geelen, G DE Wachter
{"title":"Revision ratio after Femoral Neck System implantation for hip fracture treatment: a retrospective cohort analysis.","authors":"L K Aerden, H Geelen, G DE Wachter","doi":"10.52628/90.1.11289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of the study is to determine the revision ratio after implantation of the femoral neck system (FNS) for the treatment of femoral neck fractures. A retrospective single center cohort analysis with a total of 71 patients who underwent the implantation of the FNS between December 2019 and December 2021, was performed. 31 males and 40 females were included. There was no exclusion based on BMI, ASA score, Garden classification or Pauwels classification. Primary outcome was the revision rate after FNS implantation. Secondary outcomes comprise the reason for revision surgery as well as the time toward revision surgery and the 30-day mortality. The revision ratio was 11 out of 71 patients (15.5%) with an average time to revision surgery of 10 months. Most common reason for revision was avascular necrosis (AVN) in 45.5%. Other reasons for revision surgery were implant failure due to a secondary fall on to the hip with the FNS implant in place, cut-out, cut-through and malunion in respectively 27.3%, 9%, 9% and 9% of the revision patients. The one- hole plate was used in 72% of the patients. Mean follow-up was 18.07 months (range 6-30 months). Full weight bearing instruction was given to 85.9% of the patients. Partial weight bearing in 14.1% of the patients. In conclusion, the FNS has similar revision ratio when used for femoral neck fractures compared to cannulated screw fixation in literature. The predominant reason for revision is AVN and implant failure with no difference between the use of the one- or-two-hole plate in this study.</p>","PeriodicalId":7018,"journal":{"name":"Acta orthopaedica Belgica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta orthopaedica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52628/90.1.11289","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of the study is to determine the revision ratio after implantation of the femoral neck system (FNS) for the treatment of femoral neck fractures. A retrospective single center cohort analysis with a total of 71 patients who underwent the implantation of the FNS between December 2019 and December 2021, was performed. 31 males and 40 females were included. There was no exclusion based on BMI, ASA score, Garden classification or Pauwels classification. Primary outcome was the revision rate after FNS implantation. Secondary outcomes comprise the reason for revision surgery as well as the time toward revision surgery and the 30-day mortality. The revision ratio was 11 out of 71 patients (15.5%) with an average time to revision surgery of 10 months. Most common reason for revision was avascular necrosis (AVN) in 45.5%. Other reasons for revision surgery were implant failure due to a secondary fall on to the hip with the FNS implant in place, cut-out, cut-through and malunion in respectively 27.3%, 9%, 9% and 9% of the revision patients. The one- hole plate was used in 72% of the patients. Mean follow-up was 18.07 months (range 6-30 months). Full weight bearing instruction was given to 85.9% of the patients. Partial weight bearing in 14.1% of the patients. In conclusion, the FNS has similar revision ratio when used for femoral neck fractures compared to cannulated screw fixation in literature. The predominant reason for revision is AVN and implant failure with no difference between the use of the one- or-two-hole plate in this study.

股骨颈系统植入治疗髋部骨折后的翻修率:回顾性队列分析。
本研究旨在确定股骨颈系统(FNS)植入治疗股骨颈骨折后的翻修率。该研究对2019年12月至2021年12月期间接受股骨颈系统植入术的71名患者进行了回顾性单中心队列分析。其中男性 31 人,女性 40 人。没有根据 BMI、ASA 评分、Garden 分级或 Pauwels 分级进行排除。主要结果是植入 FNS 后的翻修率。次要结果包括翻修手术原因、翻修手术时间和 30 天死亡率。71 名患者中有 11 名(15.5%)进行了翻修,翻修手术的平均时间为 10 个月。最常见的翻修原因是血管坏死(AVN),占 45.5%。翻修手术的其他原因包括:在植入 FNS 假体的情况下,髋部二次摔伤导致假体失败;切出、切透和错位,分别占翻修患者的 27.3%、9%、9% 和 9%。72%的患者使用了单孔钢板。平均随访时间为 18.07 个月(6-30 个月)。85.9%的患者接受了完全负重指导。14.1%的患者接受了部分负重指导。总之,与文献中的插管螺钉固定相比,FNS用于股骨颈骨折的翻修率相似。本研究中,股骨颈骨折翻修的主要原因是AVN和植入失败,使用单孔或双孔钢板之间没有差异。
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
Acta orthopaedica Belgica
Acta orthopaedica Belgica 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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