Search

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Limited research has been conducted on basicervical femoral neck fractures (bFNFs). The importance of displacement in clinical outcomes remains unclear. We aimed to characterize patient demographics, degree of displacement, treatment, treatment failures, and reoperations in a cohort of fractures from the Swedish Fracture Register (SFR). METHODS: 1,260 fractures in 1,185 individuals ≥ 60 years who had a bFNF registered in the SFR at 6 orthopedic departments from 2011 to 2020 were screened through radiographic review. The final sample included 291 patients with a confirmed bFNF. The medical records of these 291 patients were reviewed. We assessed baseline characteristics, initial fracture dislocation, treatment methods, tip-apex distance, failures, reoperations, and mortality. RESULTS: The mean age was 82 years (range 60-101, 55% women). 98 (34%) were undisplaced and 193 (66%) displaced. All patients underwent operative treatment. In the undisplaced group 95 (97%) patients received internal fixation (IF) and 3 (3%) had primary hip arthroplasty. In the displaced group 149 (77%) received IF and 41 (21%) had primary hip arthroplasty. 33 (11%) suffered treatment failure. When treating an undisplaced bFNF with IF, only 3 (3%) experienced treatment failure, in contrast to the 24 (16%) failure rate for a displaced bFNF. CONCLUSION: Undisplaced bFNFs have a low failure rate when treated with IF. For displaced bFNF treated with IF the failure rate is considerably higher. There is a need for further investigation of classification, treatment, and outcome of bFNF.

Aims: Our primary aim was to assess reoperation-free survival at one year after the index injury in patients aged ≥ 75 years treated with internal fixation (IF) or arthroplasty for undis-placed femoral neck fractures (uFNFs). Secondary outcomes were reoperations and mortality analyzed separately. Methods: We retrieved data on all patients aged ≥ 75 years with an uFNF registered in the Swedish Fracture Register from 2011 to 2018. The database was linked to the Swedish Arthroplasty Register and the National Patient Register to obtain information on comorbidity, mortality, and reoperations. Our primary outcome, reoperation, or death at one year was analyzed using restricted mean survival time, which gives the mean time to either event for each group separately. Results: Overall, 3,909 patients presenting with uFNFs were included. Of these patients, 3,604 were treated with IF and 305 with primary arthroplasty. There were no relevant differences in age, sex, or comorbidities between groups. In the IF group 58% received cannulated screws and 39% hook pins. In the arthroplasty group 81% were treated with hemiarthroplasty and 19% with total hip arthroplasty. At one year, 32% were dead or had been reoperated in both groups. The reoperation-free survival time over one year of follow-up was 288 days (95% confidence interval (CI) 284 to 292) in the IF group and 279 days (95% CI 264 to 295) in the arthroplasty group, with p = 0.305 for the difference. Mortality was 26% in the IF group and 31% in the arthroplasty group at one year. Reoperation rates were 7.1% in the IF group and 2.3% in the arthroplasty group. Conclusion: In older patients with a uFNF, reoperation-free survival at one year seems similar, regardless of whether IF or arthroplasty is the primary surgery. However, this comparison depends on the choice of follow-up time in that reoperations were more common after IF. In contrast, we found more early deaths after arthroplasty. Our study calls for a randomized trial com

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In patients around retirement age controversy exists as to whether to treat displaced femoral neck fracture (dFNF) with internal fixation (IF) or arthroplasty. An arthroplasty in this age group may need revision due to a long expected remaining lifetime. IF carries a higher risk of early failure but a maintained native hip if healing occurs. We aimed to determine the cumulative 5-year rate of conversion to arthroplasty after IF and implant revision after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), respectively. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this longitudinal cohort study, patients aged 60-69 years registered with a dFNF in the Swedish Fracture Register (SFR) 2012-2018 were cross-referenced with available data from the Swedish Arthroplasty Register (SAR) until December 31, 2019. Conversion to arthroplasty or revision were analyzed utilizing competing risk, with death as competing event. RESULTS: At 5 years, the cumulative rate of conversion to arthroplasty after IF was 31% (95% confidence interval [CI] 26-37). For primary THA, the 5-year rate of revision was 4.0% (CI 2.8-5.8). The 5-year mortality did not differ, being 20% (CI 16-27) and 23% (CI 20-28) after IF and THA, respectively. Regression analyses did not identify any risk factors for conversion arthroplasty based on the variables in the register. CONCLUSION: A follow-up of 5 years catches most reoperations after IF, resulting in a 31% conversion rate. The 4% revision rate at 5 years after primary THA should be seen as an intermediate result, as late complications may occur.

Background and purpose: Hip fractures should be treated based on the best available evidence and cost-effectively to optimize the outcome for this large group of frail patients. This study examined nationwide variation in surgical methods used for hip fractures. Methods: In this cohort study 46,243 patients >= 65 years with a trochanteric hip fracture (THF) or a femoral neck fracture (FNF) registered in the Swedish Fracture Register (SFR) between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2020 were included. Fractures were classified according to the AO Foundation/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) fracture classification system. The choice of surgical methods was assessed for each fracture type to compare national variation. Results 21,312 THFs and 24,072 FNFs (67% women) with a mean age of 83 years (SD 8) were surgically treated. In the treatment of two-fragment THFs (AO/OTA A1) departments ranged from using 90% short intramedullary nails to 98% sliding hip screws. Treating displaced FNFs (AO/OTA B3), the proportion of hemiarthroplasty ranged from 9 to 90%, and internal fixation between 0.6 to 21%, depending on the department. Interpretation: A mature national fracture register permits the monitoring of treatment provided and thus serves as an important aid in assessing compliance with guidelines. The large inter-departmental variation in the surgical management of hip fractures in Sweden appears unwarranted based on the current evidence, indicating a need for updated national guidelines. Further research will have to clarify the impact of this variation on mortality and re-operation rates.

Purpose: We aimed to illuminate the lived experiences and the path of recovery for adults sustaining a hip fracture before the age of 60. Methods: Participants were purposively sampled from a prospective multicenter cohort study in Sweden and Denmark, and narrative interviews were conducted with 19 individuals 0.7–3.5 years after the fracture. We used a phenomenological hermeneutic method to describe the participants’ expressed essential meaning. Results: The experience of sustaining a hip fracture was expressed as a painful and protracted process of regaining self-confidence, function, and independence. It also implied a sense of growing old from one day to the next. Participants were afraid of new falls and fractures, resulting in an increased wariness. When expressing fears and persisting symptoms, participants described being neglected and marginalized by the healthcare system, which was perceived as non-receptive and routinely driven by a notion that hip fractures affect only the elderly. Rehabilitation targeted towards needs different from those of elderly individuals was requested. Conclusion: The lived experience of sustaining a hip fracture in individuals under 60 includes substantial challenges in everyday life, even up to 3.5 years after the injury. Rehabilitation pathways tailored to the needs of younger patients are requested.

Background and purpose — Little is known on the use of metal artifact reduction sequence (MARS) MRI to diagnose osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) after fixation of femoral neck fractures (FNF) with conventional metal implants present. We compared MARS MRI with radiography in diagnosing ONFH. Secondarily, we determined whether signs of ONFH on MARS MRI correlate with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) via Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and pain (VAS). Patients and methods — 30 adults under 60 years treated with internal fixation after FNF were prospectively included (2015–2018) at 2 hospitals. They were followed up with radiography and PROs at 4, 12, and 24 months and MARS MRI at 4 and 12 months. OHS < 34 or VAS pain > 20 was considered significant. Results — At 12 months, 14 patients had a pathological MRI. 3 of 14 had ONFH on radiographs at 12 months, increasing to 5 at 24 months, and 4 had unfavorable PROs. 2 of 5 patients with ONFH signs on both MRI and radiography had unfavorable PROs. 1 of 10 patients with normal MRI and radiography had unfavorable 2-year PROs. 4 patients had inconsistent MRI results, of which 1 developed ONFH. 1 patient dropped out. Conclusion — Information from a pathological MRI was not useful, as a majority remained free from symptoms and ONFH signs on radiographs. Furthermore, PROs did not correlate with imaging results. MARS MRI findings must be better understood before being taken into clinical practice. However, a normal MARS MRI seems to be a good prog-nostic finding.