Search

• Modular fluted tapered stems are reliably used for the treatment of Vancouver b fractures. • Historically, these patients had weightbearing restrictions postoperatively. • We examined stem subsidence and mortality in patients who were allowed to immediately weight bear compared to those made non-weightbearing. • There was no difference in subsidence rate between the WBAT and NWB cohort. • Earlier weightbearing was also associated with trends toward improved all-cause mortality rates at one-year postoperatively. Modular fluted, tapered stems provide a reliable treatment for Vancouver B2/B3 fractures. Historically, these patients had weightbearing restrictions postoperatively. Although full immediate postoperative weightbearing may provide benefits in this patient population, stem subsidence is a concern. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of post-operative weight-bearing status on stem subsidence in patients treated with modular tapered stems for Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures. We sought to answer two questions: (1) Does full immediate postoperative weightbearing after revision total hip arthroplasty for periprosthetic femur fracture lead to increased stem subsidence compared to protected weightbearing? (2) Is there a mortality difference between these two groups of patients with different weightbearing restrictions? From 2009 to 2015 all patients who underwent revision for Vancouver B2/B3 fractures were made non-weightbearing (NWB) for six weeks postoperatively. After 2015, immediate weightbearing as tolerated (WBAT) was allowed postoperatively. We compared stem subsidence between immediate postoperative and final radiographs. Additionally, we performed a Kaplan-Meijer analysis with one-year mortality as an endpoint. The final cohort included forty-seven patients with an average follow-up of 254 days. The average stem subsidence was 1.0 mm (95 % CI, 0.5–1.5 mm) in the NWB cohort and 0.3 mm (95 % CI, 0–0.7 mm) in the WBAT cohort (P = 0.10). In our survivorship analysis, we noted no deaths in the WBAT cohort compared to 17 % mortality in the NWB cohort at the one-year timepoint. Allowing patients to weight bear immediately after revision does not increase stem subsidence. Further studies are needed to determine whether early weightbearing provides a mortality benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Type I, flat-wedge and type II, dual-wedge stems are currently two common stem types used in primary, uncemented hip arthroplasty. The prevalence of periprosthetic femur fracture is higher in type I stems, possibly because of the different shapes and areas of bone contact. We aimed to compare the fracture pattern, stem stability during the fracture and type of subsequent procedures in periprosthetic femur fractures between type I and II stems.Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional study conducted in a single tertiary referral hospital of Taipei, Taiwan. We included primary hip arthroplasty procedures using type I or type II stems complicated with postoperative periprosthetic femur fractures. We recorded the age, sex, ASA grade, index procedure, institution of where the index procedure was performed, trauma mechanism, time from index procedure to fracture, procedure for periprosthetic fracture and radiographic parameters including Dorr type, Vancouver classification, stem stability, fracture pattern, type and brand of the stems for analysis.Results: We included 132 patients who had undergone surgery for periprosthetic femur fracture for type I (N = 46) or type II (N = 86) stems. The mean age was 74.5 years and 52.3% of the patients were female. Type I stems were associated with a higher proportion of a complex fracture pattern (52.2% vs. 8.2%), femoral stem loosening (78.2% vs. 60.4%) and a higher rate of revision stem procedures (69.6% vs. 50.0%) compared with type II stems. Using multivariate analysis, type I stem was the only factor for a complex fracture pattern in the overall population (aOR: 23.60, 95% CI: 6.54-85.16), hemiarthroplasty (aOR: 160.50, 95% CI: 9.77-2635.95) and total hip arthroplasty (aOR: 14.17, 95% CI: 2.92-68.79) subgroups.Conclusion: We observed a difference in fracture patterns between type I and type II stems. Type I stems appear to be an independent risk factor for a complex fracture pattern in patients who had undergone primary hip arthroplasty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]