Search

Objectives: To determine the potential risk factors for intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods: This was a retrospective study. Patients who were diagnosed with DDH and undergoing THA (by artificial joint replacement) at our hospital from January 1999 to December 2019 were included in this study. Clinical and radiological factors were obtained from their medical records, such as age, sex, Crowe classification, morphological features of proximal femur, and features of surgical procedure. The outcome of interest was the occurrence of intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fracture, which was recorded and classified according to the Vancouver classification system. According to the fracture status, the patients were divided into two groups: the fracture group and the non‐fracture group. Multivariate logistic regression model was built to identify the risk factors for these fractures. Results: A total of 1252 hips were finally included. Intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures were identified in 62 hips. The incidence of intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures in patients with DDH undergoing THA was 4.95%. There were 22 patients (proportion = 35.48%, incidence = 1.76%) with Type A fractures, 38 (proportion = 61.29%, incidence = 3.04%) with Type B fractures, and two (proportion = 3.23%, incidence = 0.16%) with Type C fractures. Six independent risk factors for intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures were identified: osteoporosis (OR = 3.434; 95% CI, 1.963–6.007), previous surgical history (OR = 4.797; 95% CI, 2.446–9.410), Dorr Type A canal (OR = 3.025; 95% CI, 1.594–5.738), retained femoral neck length (OR = 1.121; 95% CI, 1.043–1.204), implanted metaphyseal‐diaphyseal fixation stems (OR = 3.208; 95% CI, 1.562–6.591), and implanted stem with anteversion design (OR = 2.916; 95% CI, 1.473–5.770). Conclusions: The overall incidence of intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures in patients with DDH undergoing THA was 4.95%, which was at a moderate level compared to patients with other diseases undergoing THA. Six independent risk factors were identified: osteoporosis, previous surgical history, Dorr Type A canal, insufficient neck osteotomy level, implantation of metaphyseal‐diaphyseal fixation stem, and implantation of a stem with an anteversion design. Comprehending these risk factors might help surgeons prevent the occurrence of these intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures in patients with DDH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although there are several different kinds of fixation techniques for the sacroiliac fracture-dislocation, the treatment remains a challenge for orthopedic surgeons.Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the stability of sacroiliac fracture-dislocation fixed with two iliosacral (IS) screws, tension band plate (TBP), and minimally invasive adjustable plate (MIAP).Methods: Five human cadavers (L4-pelvic-femora) were used to compare biomechanical stability. The pubic symphysis separation and left sacroiliac dislocation were created. The symphysis pubis was stabilized with a five-hole plate. The sacroiliac joint dislocation fracture was fixed with three kinds of internal fixation in a randomized design. The specimens were fastened in a biomechanical machine with a cycle vertical load. Displacements of the whole specimen and shifts in the fracture gap were recorded.Results: Under different vertical loads, the shifts in the fracture gap and the displacements of the pelvis fixed with MIAP were similar to those in fractures fixed with two IS screws. However, the shifts in the fracture gap and the displacements of the pelvis fixed with MIAP were significantly smaller than those fixed with TBP.Conclusions: The stability of the sacroiliac joint dislocation fixed with MIAP was similar to that of dislocation fixed with two IS screws, and MIAP performed better than the TBP under vertical load. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]