Search

Background: Knee periprosthetic femoral fractures (KPPFF) are becoming more frequent due to the increasing number of arthroplasties and the aging population, for whom maintaining autonomy and function remains a challenge. The use of locking plates has improved functional results and promoted the development of "minimally invasive" surgical (MIS) approaches. Despite the availability of literature comparing between different types of osteosynthesis for KPPFF, there is a paucity of information available on the complications of osteosynthesis using locking plates, depending on the approach. We therefore carried out a retrospective multicenter study (nine centers: Dijon, Grenoble, Lille, Marseille, Nice, Paris, Saint-Étienne, Strasbourg, Colmar) as part of a Symposium of the French Society of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology (SOFCOT). Following osteosynthesis of KPPFF by locking plates carried out by a standard approach or by a minimally invasive approach (MIS), the objectives were: (1) to compare the complications, (2) to evaluate whether the radiological and clinical results (rate and time of consolidation, resumption of weight bearing, lack of reduction, postoperative autonomy) were comparable in the two groups., Hypothesis: The hypothesis was that performing an MIS approach in these indications does not confer more complications than a standard approach, and rather, the MIS approach offers better functional and radiological results., Material and Method: Five hundred and seventy-three patients presented with KPPFF over the periods studied (retrospective series from January 2012 to December 2016, then prospective series from January to December 2019). After applying the inclusion criteria (KPPFF by locking plate) and exclusion criteria (tumor context, infectious, intraoperative fractures, fractures on loose prostheses, other osteosynthesis methods, treatment by prosthetic revision, patients under the age of 18, follow-up less than 1-year, incomplete files), a global series of 306 patients was retained. Two groups were created according to the approach performed: a standard approach group (S, n=228) and a minimally invasive approach group (MIS, n=78). The demographic data of the population were recorded, as was the criteria for autonomy (Parker score, place of living). Postoperative complications were sought (infection, mechanical complication, surgical revision). Finally, the radiological and clinical results were evaluated (rate of, and time to consolidation, resumption of weight bearing, lack of reduction, postoperative autonomy)., Results: The comparison of the two subgroups, S and MIS, found complication rates are comparable in the two groups in terms of infections [S group: n=18 (7.9%), MIS group: n=2 (2.6%)], mechanical complications [S: n=23 (10.1%), MIS: n=2 (2.6%)], and surgical revision [S: n=33 (14.5%), MIS: n=7 (8.9%)], and a lack of difference in postoperative autonomy [Parker; S group: 4.7±2.4 (0-9) vs. MIS group: 5±2, 7 (0-9)]. On the other hand, the time to return to weight bearing was shorter in the MIS group [4.3±3.5weeks (0-12) versus 10.1±10.1weeks (0-110), p<0.001]. The rate of nonunion was lower in the MIS group [n=1 vs. n=20, i.e. 1.7% vs. 11.1% (p=0.031)] and the time to consolidation was shorter [7.5±4.3weeks (6-30) versus 15.2±9.4weeks (5-78) (p<0.001)]., Conclusion: Performing an MIS approach in the management of KPPFF by locking plate osteosynthesis does not cause any more complications than a standard approach. In addition, higher consolidation rates can be obtained in shorter periods of time. This study suggests that it proposing osteosynthesis using the MIS approach as a primary surgery is a reasonable choice when treatment using locking plates is chosen for a KPPFF, subject to technical expertise., Level of Evidence: III; observational study., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Periprosthetic femur fractures after total knee arthroplasty in older adults are mostly treated by internal fixation. Members of the GETRAUM (French Orthopedic Trauma Society) sought to compare two surgical techniques - conventional open surgery and minimally invasive surgery - with the aim of analyzing the patients' functional recovery. We hypothesized that a minimally invasive technique would produce better early functional outcomes with recovery of independence., Materials and Methods: This retrospective multicenter study of patients treated between 2009 and 2015 consisted of 90 fractures with a follow-up of 1 year. Demographic, preoperative data and the characteristics of fractures, type of fixation and the surgeon's experience level were collected. The endpoints were the Parker Mobility score, Katz ADL, place of residence at the time of fracture and at 6 months and one-year follow-up. All complications and one-year mortality during the follow up were searched., Results: At 6 months follow-up, the minimally invasive technique contributed to significantly better functional recovery as measured by the Parker (p < 0.05) and Katz scores (p < 0.05). However, there were no differences in these scores at one-year follow-up. The complication rate was 31% at one year follow-up. Mortality rate was 12 % (11 patients)., Conclusion: Our hypothesis was confirmed, as there was a difference between techniques that impacted functional recovery and independence, but only in the early postoperative phase. A minimally invasive technique appears to be beneficial in the short term for distal femur fractures after total knee arthroplasty but must be evaluated in a comparative and prospective study to fully confirm its reliability., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Christophe Chantelot, Marc Saab, Arnaud Kaba, Thierry Bégué, Henri Favreau: none Matthieu Ehlinger: educational consultant for DePuy Synthes, Newclip Technics and Lépine, (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Introduction: Proximal femur fractures in elderly patients pose a common problem that requires surgical management. The main objective of this study was to compare the results of treatment by locked plate (LP) and by anterograde (AIN) or retrograde (RIN) intramedullary nailing. The secondary objective was to analyze the complications related to each group. The hypothesis of this study was that the radiological and clinical results of each group were comparable., Materials and Methods: The data of 438 patients from 8 centers were studied retrospectively with 365 LP and 69 cases of intramedullary nailing (49 AIN and 20 RIN). The groups were comparable in terms of mean age (75±2years), mean preoperative Parker score (5.3±0.5) and mean KOOS score (74±2). Most patients lived at home before their fracture [n=375 (86%)]. At follow-up, the joint range of motion, the KOOS and Parker scores, living premises, the time required to regain full weight-bearing, the time required for consolidation as well as the reduction alignment: frontal, sagittal, horizontal., Results: The average follow-up was: 79±2weeks (65 to 82). The functional and radiological results were comparable, although nailing allowed a faster return to weight-bearing (1±2weeks for nailing versus 7±2weeks for LP, p=0.048) and a better postoperative Parker score (5.5±0.5 for nailing versus 4.7±0.2 for LP, p=0.045). Rotational malalignment in femoral nailing was often in the direction of internal rotation, compared to the LP (p=0.045). Complications were comparable with the exception of mortality, which was more frequent for LP [22.5% in the LP group versus 13% in the nailing group (p=0.045)]. Complications were categorized as: mechanical complications 6.8% of LP, 5.7% of nailing (p>0.05), infections [11% of LP, 5.8% of nailing (p>0.05)], surgical revisions [2% of LP, 10% of nailing (p>0.05)]., Discussion and Conclusion: The hypothesis was refuted. These results show that nailing conferred a faster recovery of weight-bearing, a better Parker score, and is associated with a lower mortality rate. The morbidity rate is comparable between the two techniques. Indeed, when the indication for osteosynthesis by LP or by nailing is made, and both choices are technically justifiable, it would be prudent to favor the technique, which carries the least risk, which in this case is nailing. This conclusion must, however, be taken in to consideration with regard to the reduced number of nailing. A larger series of nailing, particularly retrograde, would be necessary to be able to confirm this last difference between the 2 groups., Level of Evidence: IV; comparative retrospective study., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Periprosthetic fractures of the distal femur most commonly present as fragility fractures associated with relatively minor trauma. These injuries are often complicated by osteopenia of the distal femur secondary to stress shielding or osteolysis. Effective management of periprosthetic fractures of the distal femur requires knowledge of both fracture fixation techniques and revision arthroplasty. This article reviews the treatment options for these challenging fractures with a particular focus on the management of displaced fractures with a stable prosthesis.