This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) CME: Take the activity for this article: Adult Hip Reconstruction Test 15: Fall 2005 Letters to the Editor: Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services E-mail this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My File Cabinet Download to citation manager Rights and Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Klein, G. R. Articles by Purtill, J. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Klein, G. R. Articles by Purtill, J. J. Related Collections Adult Hip Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Proximal Femoral Replacement for the Treatment of Periprosthetic Fractures

¹ Rothman Institute of Orthopedics, 925 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19107. E-mail address for J. Parvizi: parvj{at}aol.com

Investigation performed at the Rothman Institute of Orthopedics at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

The authors did not receive grants or outside funding in support of their research or preparation of this manuscript. They did not receive payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, educational institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors are affiliated or associated.

Methods: With use of a computerized institutional database, all patients in whom a Vancouver type-B3 fracture (characterized by severe proximal bone deficiency and a loose femoral stem) had been treated with a proximal femoral replacement were identified. A modular femoral replacement with proximal porous coating had been used in all cases. The twenty-one patients who were identified had had a mean age of 78.3 years (range, fifty-two to ninety years) at the time of the index operation. The clinical and radiographic records of these patients were reviewed.

Results: At the time of the latest follow-up (mean, 3.2 years), all but one of the patients were able to walk and had minimal to no pain. Complications included persistent wound drainage that was treated with incision and drainage (two hips), dislocation (two hips), refracture of the femur distal to the stem (one hip), and acetabular cage failure (one hip).

Conclusions: Despite a relatively high complication rate, we believe that proximal femoral replacement is a viable option for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures in older patients with severe bone deficiency. If a proximal femoral replacement is used, the stability of the hip must be tested diligently intraoperatively and a constrained acetabular liner should be utilized if instability is encountered. In order to enhance the bone stock, the proximal part of the femur, however poor in quality, should be retained for reapproximation onto the implant.

Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Facebook    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. P. Cannon, P. P. Lin, V. O. Lewis, and A. W. Yasko Management of Radiation-associated Fractures J. Am. Acad. Ortho. Surg., September 1, 2008; 16(9): 541 - 549. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press (TM) assists in the publication of JBJS Online.
Copyright © 2005 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. Online ISSN: 1535-1386.
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery®, JBJS®, JB&JS®, and eJBJS® are registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.