50岁后股骨颈骨折

P. Simon , F. Gouin , D. Veillard , P. Laffargue , M. Ehlinger , J.-C. Bel , R. Lopez , P. Beaudet , F. Luickx , V. Molina , L.-E. Pidhorz , N. Bigorre , A. Rochwerger , F. Azam , M.-L. Louis , P. Cottias , S. Hamonic , D. Veillard , F. Vogt , P.-M. Cambas , X. Roussignol
{"title":"50岁后股骨颈骨折","authors":"P. Simon ,&nbsp;F. Gouin ,&nbsp;D. Veillard ,&nbsp;P. Laffargue ,&nbsp;M. Ehlinger ,&nbsp;J.-C. Bel ,&nbsp;R. Lopez ,&nbsp;P. Beaudet ,&nbsp;F. Luickx ,&nbsp;V. Molina ,&nbsp;L.-E. Pidhorz ,&nbsp;N. Bigorre ,&nbsp;A. Rochwerger ,&nbsp;F. Azam ,&nbsp;M.-L. Louis ,&nbsp;P. Cottias ,&nbsp;S. Hamonic ,&nbsp;D. Veillard ,&nbsp;F. Vogt ,&nbsp;P.-M. Cambas ,&nbsp;X. Roussignol","doi":"10.1016/j.rco.2008.06.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Despite many papers and instructional course lectures, therapeutic guidelines are not clearly defined about treatment of femoral neck fractures. The aim of this multicentric French symposium was to prospectively study the results of current therapeutic options in order to propose scientifically proven options.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>Three prospective studies were carried out in order to answer to these questions: (1) is it possible with anatomical reduction and stable fixation to lower the non union and osteonecrosis rate? (2) is functional treatment of Garden 1 fractures successful in more than 65 years patients? (3) what criteria are useful to choose the kind of arthroplasty for more than 65 years patients?</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>For the 64 patients between 50 and 65 years old included in the first study, 44 ORIF and 17 prostheses were performed. No open reduction was performed in this series despite a 34% malreduction rate. The risk for displacement after functional treatment of Garden 1 fractures is 31%.</p><p>For patients over 65 years old, almost fractures are treated in this series by an arthroplasty. The one-year mortality rate after displaced femoral neck fracture was 17%. Functional results were better in total hip prosthesis group than in bipolar or unipolar group. Non cemented stems were not safer than cemented ones in frail patients.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion and conclusions</h3><p>For young patients, ORIF should be the treatment of choice: the initial displacement and its effects on the femoral head vascularisation, the quality of reduction and fixation are the two most significant factors for good outcome. For Garden 1, fractures in patients 65 years old or more, it is proposed to performed an internal fixation despite in two thirds of the cases, it should be unnecessary because non identification of predictive factors of failure. For patients over 65 years old, the type of arthroplasty to perform in displaced fractures is to be chosen according to the preoperative mobility and comorbidities. Because of acetabular erosion with long-term follow-up, it is clearly indicated to perform total hip replacement for patients with life expectancy of 10 years or more. For frail patients, unipolar arthroplasty is the best option. The place for bipolar or uncemented implants is not yet well-defined and more prospective trials are needed. In this multicentric study, results appear quite different in terms of mortality, or functional status. These differences seem to be related to technical choice, geriatric care, nutritional consideration or surgical organisation, all factors that may be of major importance for prognostic.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":76468,"journal":{"name":"Revue de chirurgie orthopedique et reparatrice de l'appareil moteur","volume":"94 6","pages":"Pages 108-132"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rco.2008.06.006","citationCount":"70","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Les fractures du col du fémur après 50 ans\",\"authors\":\"P. Simon ,&nbsp;F. Gouin ,&nbsp;D. Veillard ,&nbsp;P. Laffargue ,&nbsp;M. Ehlinger ,&nbsp;J.-C. Bel ,&nbsp;R. Lopez ,&nbsp;P. Beaudet ,&nbsp;F. Luickx ,&nbsp;V. Molina ,&nbsp;L.-E. Pidhorz ,&nbsp;N. Bigorre ,&nbsp;A. Rochwerger ,&nbsp;F. Azam ,&nbsp;M.-L. Louis ,&nbsp;P. Cottias ,&nbsp;S. Hamonic ,&nbsp;D. Veillard ,&nbsp;F. Vogt ,&nbsp;P.-M. Cambas ,&nbsp;X. Roussignol\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rco.2008.06.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Despite many papers and instructional course lectures, therapeutic guidelines are not clearly defined about treatment of femoral neck fractures. The aim of this multicentric French symposium was to prospectively study the results of current therapeutic options in order to propose scientifically proven options.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>Three prospective studies were carried out in order to answer to these questions: (1) is it possible with anatomical reduction and stable fixation to lower the non union and osteonecrosis rate? (2) is functional treatment of Garden 1 fractures successful in more than 65 years patients? (3) what criteria are useful to choose the kind of arthroplasty for more than 65 years patients?</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>For the 64 patients between 50 and 65 years old included in the first study, 44 ORIF and 17 prostheses were performed. No open reduction was performed in this series despite a 34% malreduction rate. The risk for displacement after functional treatment of Garden 1 fractures is 31%.</p><p>For patients over 65 years old, almost fractures are treated in this series by an arthroplasty. The one-year mortality rate after displaced femoral neck fracture was 17%. Functional results were better in total hip prosthesis group than in bipolar or unipolar group. Non cemented stems were not safer than cemented ones in frail patients.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion and conclusions</h3><p>For young patients, ORIF should be the treatment of choice: the initial displacement and its effects on the femoral head vascularisation, the quality of reduction and fixation are the two most significant factors for good outcome. For Garden 1, fractures in patients 65 years old or more, it is proposed to performed an internal fixation despite in two thirds of the cases, it should be unnecessary because non identification of predictive factors of failure. For patients over 65 years old, the type of arthroplasty to perform in displaced fractures is to be chosen according to the preoperative mobility and comorbidities. Because of acetabular erosion with long-term follow-up, it is clearly indicated to perform total hip replacement for patients with life expectancy of 10 years or more. For frail patients, unipolar arthroplasty is the best option. The place for bipolar or uncemented implants is not yet well-defined and more prospective trials are needed. In this multicentric study, results appear quite different in terms of mortality, or functional status. These differences seem to be related to technical choice, geriatric care, nutritional consideration or surgical organisation, all factors that may be of major importance for prognostic.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":76468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revue de chirurgie orthopedique et reparatrice de l'appareil moteur\",\"volume\":\"94 6\",\"pages\":\"Pages 108-132\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rco.2008.06.006\",\"citationCount\":\"70\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revue de chirurgie orthopedique et reparatrice de l'appareil moteur\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0035104008002699\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revue de chirurgie orthopedique et reparatrice de l'appareil moteur","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0035104008002699","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 70

摘要

尽管有许多论文和教学课程,但股骨颈骨折的治疗指南并没有明确的定义。这次多中心法国研讨会的目的是前瞻性研究当前治疗方案的结果,以提出科学证明的方案。材料和方法为了回答以下问题,我们进行了三项前瞻性研究:(1)解剖复位和稳定固定是否有可能降低骨不愈合和骨坏死的发生率?(2)对于年龄大于65岁的Garden 1型骨折患者,功能治疗是否成功?(3) 65岁以上患者选择关节置换术的标准是什么?结果在第一项研究中纳入的64例50 - 65岁患者中,44例行ORIF, 17例行假体。尽管有34%的复位不良率,但在该系列中未进行切开复位。Garden 1型骨折功能治疗后发生移位的风险为31%。对于65岁以上的患者,几乎所有的骨折都是通过关节置换术来治疗的。移位性股骨颈骨折后1年死亡率为17%。全髋关节假体组功能结果优于双极组和单极组。在体弱患者中,非骨水泥支架并不比骨水泥支架更安全。讨论与结论对于年轻患者,ORIF应该是治疗的选择:初始移位及其对股骨头血管的影响,复位和固定的质量是获得良好结果的两个最重要的因素。对于Garden 1, 65岁及以上患者的骨折,建议进行内固定,尽管在三分之二的病例中,由于无法识别失败的预测因素,应该没有必要进行内固定。对于65岁以上的患者,应根据术前活动能力和合并症选择移位性骨折的关节置换类型。由于长期随访发现髋臼糜烂,对于预期寿命在10年及以上的患者,明确建议行全髋关节置换术。对于身体虚弱的病人,单极关节置换术是最好的选择。双相或非胶结植入物的应用尚不明确,需要更多的前瞻性试验。在这项多中心研究中,在死亡率或功能状态方面的结果似乎大相径庭。这些差异似乎与技术选择、老年护理、营养考虑或手术组织有关,所有这些因素都可能对预后具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Les fractures du col du fémur après 50 ans

Introduction

Despite many papers and instructional course lectures, therapeutic guidelines are not clearly defined about treatment of femoral neck fractures. The aim of this multicentric French symposium was to prospectively study the results of current therapeutic options in order to propose scientifically proven options.

Material and methods

Three prospective studies were carried out in order to answer to these questions: (1) is it possible with anatomical reduction and stable fixation to lower the non union and osteonecrosis rate? (2) is functional treatment of Garden 1 fractures successful in more than 65 years patients? (3) what criteria are useful to choose the kind of arthroplasty for more than 65 years patients?

Results

For the 64 patients between 50 and 65 years old included in the first study, 44 ORIF and 17 prostheses were performed. No open reduction was performed in this series despite a 34% malreduction rate. The risk for displacement after functional treatment of Garden 1 fractures is 31%.

For patients over 65 years old, almost fractures are treated in this series by an arthroplasty. The one-year mortality rate after displaced femoral neck fracture was 17%. Functional results were better in total hip prosthesis group than in bipolar or unipolar group. Non cemented stems were not safer than cemented ones in frail patients.

Discussion and conclusions

For young patients, ORIF should be the treatment of choice: the initial displacement and its effects on the femoral head vascularisation, the quality of reduction and fixation are the two most significant factors for good outcome. For Garden 1, fractures in patients 65 years old or more, it is proposed to performed an internal fixation despite in two thirds of the cases, it should be unnecessary because non identification of predictive factors of failure. For patients over 65 years old, the type of arthroplasty to perform in displaced fractures is to be chosen according to the preoperative mobility and comorbidities. Because of acetabular erosion with long-term follow-up, it is clearly indicated to perform total hip replacement for patients with life expectancy of 10 years or more. For frail patients, unipolar arthroplasty is the best option. The place for bipolar or uncemented implants is not yet well-defined and more prospective trials are needed. In this multicentric study, results appear quite different in terms of mortality, or functional status. These differences seem to be related to technical choice, geriatric care, nutritional consideration or surgical organisation, all factors that may be of major importance for prognostic.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信