The Biological Metallic versus Metallic Solution in Treating Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures: Outcome Assessment

S. Carta, M. Fortina, A. Riva, L. Meccariello, E. Manzi, Antonio Di Giovanni, P. Ferrata
{"title":"The Biological Metallic versus Metallic Solution in Treating Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures: Outcome Assessment","authors":"S. Carta, M. Fortina, A. Riva, L. Meccariello, E. Manzi, Antonio Di Giovanni, P. Ferrata","doi":"10.1155/2016/2918735","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. The periprosthetic fracture of the femur is, in order of frequency, the fourth leading cause (5.9%) of surgical revision. Our study aims to demonstrate how the grafting of bone splint betters the outcomes. Materials. We treated 15 periprosthetic femoral fractures divided into two groups: PS composed of 8 patients treated with plates and splints and PSS involving 7 patients treated only with plates. The evaluation criteria for the two groups during the clinical and radiological follow-up were the quality of life measured by the Short Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36), Harris Hip Score (HHS), Modified Cincinnati Rating System Questionnaire (MCRSQ), bone healing measured by the Radiographic Union Score (RUS), postoperative complications, and mortality. The evaluation endpoint was set at 24 months for both groups (p < 0.05). Results. The surgery lasted an average of 124.5 minutes for the PS group and 112.6 minutes for the PSS. At 24 months all clinical and radiographic scores were p < 0.05 for the PS group. During follow-up 4 patients (2 in each group) died of causes not related to surgery. Conclusions. The use of the metal plate as opposed to cortical allogenic splint should be taken into consideration as a noteworthy point for periprosthetic femoral fractures.","PeriodicalId":53309,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Medicine","volume":"85 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/2918735","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Introduction. The periprosthetic fracture of the femur is, in order of frequency, the fourth leading cause (5.9%) of surgical revision. Our study aims to demonstrate how the grafting of bone splint betters the outcomes. Materials. We treated 15 periprosthetic femoral fractures divided into two groups: PS composed of 8 patients treated with plates and splints and PSS involving 7 patients treated only with plates. The evaluation criteria for the two groups during the clinical and radiological follow-up were the quality of life measured by the Short Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36), Harris Hip Score (HHS), Modified Cincinnati Rating System Questionnaire (MCRSQ), bone healing measured by the Radiographic Union Score (RUS), postoperative complications, and mortality. The evaluation endpoint was set at 24 months for both groups (p < 0.05). Results. The surgery lasted an average of 124.5 minutes for the PS group and 112.6 minutes for the PSS. At 24 months all clinical and radiographic scores were p < 0.05 for the PS group. During follow-up 4 patients (2 in each group) died of causes not related to surgery. Conclusions. The use of the metal plate as opposed to cortical allogenic splint should be taken into consideration as a noteworthy point for periprosthetic femoral fractures.
生物金属与金属溶液治疗股骨假体周围骨折:结果评估
介绍。股骨假体周围骨折是手术翻修的第四大原因(5.9%)。我们的研究旨在证明骨夹板移植如何改善预后。材料。我们治疗了15例股骨假体周围骨折,分为两组:8例采用钢板和夹板治疗的PS组和7例仅采用钢板治疗的PSS组。在临床和放射学随访期间,两组患者的评价标准分别为生活质量(SF-36)、Harris髋关节评分(HHS)、改良辛辛那提评分系统问卷(MCRSQ)、骨愈合(RUS)、术后并发症和死亡率。两组的评价终点均为24个月(p < 0.05)。结果。PS组平均手术时间为124.5分钟,PSS组平均手术时间为112.6分钟。24个月时,PS组的临床和影像学评分均p < 0.05。随访期间,4例患者(每组2例)死于与手术无关的原因。结论。对于股骨假体周围骨折,应考虑使用金属钢板而不是皮质同种异体夹板。
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
5
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
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