Peri-periprosthetic femoral fractures: a single-centre case series of a rare and challenging clinical scenario.

IF 2.2
Renato Matteotti, Giovanni Dalla Vecchia, Andrea Masotti, Luca Monticelli, Michele Nardi, Lorenzo Fiore
{"title":"Peri-periprosthetic femoral fractures: a single-centre case series of a rare and challenging clinical scenario.","authors":"Renato Matteotti, Giovanni Dalla Vecchia, Andrea Masotti, Luca Monticelli, Michele Nardi, Lorenzo Fiore","doi":"10.1007/s00068-026-03340-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) are an increasingly common complication of hip arthroplasty. A poorly defined scenario is a new femoral fracture after a previously treated PFF has united, which we term a peri-periprosthetic femoral fracture.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed 154 surgically treated PFF episodes in patients aged over 65 years at our institution between 2011 and 2021. A peri-periprosthetic fracture was defined as a new acute femoral fracture after documented radiographic union of a previously treated PFF. Clinical, surgical, and radiographic data were reviewed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven patients (4.5% of the institutional PFF cohort) met the criteria. Mean age was 83.1 years and 6 (85.7%) were female. The mean interval to the peri-periprosthetic fracture was 37.3 months (median 27; range 7-105). By the Vancouver classification, 3 fractures were type B1, 1 type B3, and 3 type C. Treatment was individualised to fracture configuration, prosthetic stability, hardware, and bone stock. Radiographic union was documented in all 4 patients with adequate follow-up, at a mean of 4.3 months. Five patients regained ambulation; one with pre-existing limitations did not, and ambulatory status was unavailable for one. Medical complications occurred in 2 patients, and no major orthopaedic complication required reoperation. Mortality was 14.3% at one year and 42.9% at two years.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Peri-periprosthetic femoral fractures constitute a rare and technically demanding scenario, distinct from delayed union, nonunion, refracture through an incompletely healed fracture, and fixation failure. Treatment should be individualised to prosthetic stability, pre-existing hardware, fracture morphology, and residual bone stock.</p>","PeriodicalId":520620,"journal":{"name":"European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-026-03340-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) are an increasingly common complication of hip arthroplasty. A poorly defined scenario is a new femoral fracture after a previously treated PFF has united, which we term a peri-periprosthetic femoral fracture.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 154 surgically treated PFF episodes in patients aged over 65 years at our institution between 2011 and 2021. A peri-periprosthetic fracture was defined as a new acute femoral fracture after documented radiographic union of a previously treated PFF. Clinical, surgical, and radiographic data were reviewed.

Results: Seven patients (4.5% of the institutional PFF cohort) met the criteria. Mean age was 83.1 years and 6 (85.7%) were female. The mean interval to the peri-periprosthetic fracture was 37.3 months (median 27; range 7-105). By the Vancouver classification, 3 fractures were type B1, 1 type B3, and 3 type C. Treatment was individualised to fracture configuration, prosthetic stability, hardware, and bone stock. Radiographic union was documented in all 4 patients with adequate follow-up, at a mean of 4.3 months. Five patients regained ambulation; one with pre-existing limitations did not, and ambulatory status was unavailable for one. Medical complications occurred in 2 patients, and no major orthopaedic complication required reoperation. Mortality was 14.3% at one year and 42.9% at two years.

Conclusion: Peri-periprosthetic femoral fractures constitute a rare and technically demanding scenario, distinct from delayed union, nonunion, refracture through an incompletely healed fracture, and fixation failure. Treatment should be individualised to prosthetic stability, pre-existing hardware, fracture morphology, and residual bone stock.

股骨假体周围骨折:一个罕见且具有挑战性的临床场景的单中心病例系列。
目的:股骨假体周围骨折(pff)是髋关节置换术中越来越常见的并发症。一种不明确的情况是在先前治疗的PFF愈合后发生新的股骨骨折,我们称之为股骨假体周围骨折。方法:我们回顾性分析了2011年至2021年在我院接受手术治疗的154例65岁以上PFF发作患者。假体周围骨折被定义为先前治疗过的PFF在影像学上愈合后发生的新的急性股骨骨折。我们回顾了临床、手术和放射学资料。结果:7例患者(占机构PFF队列的4.5%)符合标准。平均年龄83.1岁,女性6例(85.7%)。假体周围骨折的平均时间间隔为37.3个月(中位27个月,范围7-105个月)。根据Vancouver分类,3例骨折为B1型,1例为B3型,3例为c型。治疗根据骨折形态、假体稳定性、硬体和骨库存进行个性化治疗。所有4例患者均有充分的随访,平均随访时间为4.3个月。5例恢复行走;有先前存在的限制的人没有,并且一个人无法获得流动状态。2例出现医学并发症,无重大骨科并发症需再次手术。1年死亡率为14.3%,2年死亡率为42.9%。结论:股骨假体周围骨折是一种罕见且技术要求高的情况,不同于延迟愈合、不愈合、骨折不完全愈合导致的再骨折和固定失败。治疗应根据假体的稳定性、已有的硬体、骨折形态和残余骨存量进行个体化治疗。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书