Hip Arthroplasty After Surgical Treatment of Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures

Brandon J. Yuan, Matthew Abdel, William W. Cross, Daniel J. Berry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Although use of intramedullary hip screws (IMHS) for intertrochanteric (IT) hip fractures has become more common, limited data have suggested difficulties in conversion to hip arthroplasty. The present study investigates whether conversion of failed IT fracture fixation with an intramedullary vs extramedullary device leads to different rates or types of complications or decreased arthroplasty survivorship. Methods: One hundred eleven patients were converted to hip arthroplasty after previous surgical treatment of an IT fracture from 2000 to 2010. Seventy hips had been treated with an extramedullary fixation device (EFD) and 41 with an IMHS. Results: Length of hospital stay and operative times were similar (6 days and 206 minutes for EFD vs 6 days and 208 minutes for IMHS; P >.7). The presence of a Trendelenburg gait at last clinical follow-up was similar between groups (37% in EFD group and 38% in IMHS group). Five-year survivorship free of revision was 95% in the EFD group and 94% in the IMHS group (P = 1.0). The overall complication rate was similar (21% for EFD vs 27% for IMHS; P =.51) between groups. The most common complication was late periprosthetic fracture in the EFD patients (6% vs 0% in IMHS; P =.29) and intraoperative femoral fracture in the IMHS patients (12% vs 1% in EFD; P =.02). Conclusion: The short-term survivorship of conversion hip arthroplasty after surgical treatment of an IT fracture is excellent regardless of original fracture fixation method. If early complications, particularly periprosthetic fractures, can be minimized, the likelihood of a successful outcome is high. The risk of intraoperative femoral fracture was greater during conversion from an IMHS compared to an EFD.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3438-3444
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Arthroplasty
Volume32
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2017

Fingerprint

Hip Fractures
Arthroplasty
Hip
Equipment and Supplies
Therapeutics
Periprosthetic Fractures
Fracture Fixation
Femoral Fractures
Survival Rate
Length of Stay
Operative Time
Gait

Keywords

  • conversion hip arthroplasty
  • hip arthroplasty
  • hip fracture
  • intertrochanteric hip fracture
  • periprosthetic fracture

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Hip Arthroplasty After Surgical Treatment of Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures. / Yuan, Brandon J.; Abdel, Matthew; Cross, William W.; Berry, Daniel J.

In: Journal of Arthroplasty, Vol. 32, No. 11, 01.11.2017, p. 3438-3444.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Yuan, Brandon J. ; Abdel, Matthew ; Cross, William W. ; Berry, Daniel J. / Hip Arthroplasty After Surgical Treatment of Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures. In: Journal of Arthroplasty. 2017 ; Vol. 32, No. 11. pp. 3438-3444.
@article{d3cebf626ea44ff88cf976026a9e0db0,
title = "Hip Arthroplasty After Surgical Treatment of Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures",
abstract = "Background: Although use of intramedullary hip screws (IMHS) for intertrochanteric (IT) hip fractures has become more common, limited data have suggested difficulties in conversion to hip arthroplasty. The present study investigates whether conversion of failed IT fracture fixation with an intramedullary vs extramedullary device leads to different rates or types of complications or decreased arthroplasty survivorship. Methods: One hundred eleven patients were converted to hip arthroplasty after previous surgical treatment of an IT fracture from 2000 to 2010. Seventy hips had been treated with an extramedullary fixation device (EFD) and 41 with an IMHS. Results: Length of hospital stay and operative times were similar (6 days and 206 minutes for EFD vs 6 days and 208 minutes for IMHS; P >.7). The presence of a Trendelenburg gait at last clinical follow-up was similar between groups (37{\%} in EFD group and 38{\%} in IMHS group). Five-year survivorship free of revision was 95{\%} in the EFD group and 94{\%} in the IMHS group (P = 1.0). The overall complication rate was similar (21{\%} for EFD vs 27{\%} for IMHS; P =.51) between groups. The most common complication was late periprosthetic fracture in the EFD patients (6{\%} vs 0{\%} in IMHS; P =.29) and intraoperative femoral fracture in the IMHS patients (12{\%} vs 1{\%} in EFD; P =.02). Conclusion: The short-term survivorship of conversion hip arthroplasty after surgical treatment of an IT fracture is excellent regardless of original fracture fixation method. If early complications, particularly periprosthetic fractures, can be minimized, the likelihood of a successful outcome is high. The risk of intraoperative femoral fracture was greater during conversion from an IMHS compared to an EFD.",
keywords = "conversion hip arthroplasty, hip arthroplasty, hip fracture, intertrochanteric hip fracture, periprosthetic fracture",
author = "Yuan, {Brandon J.} and Matthew Abdel and Cross, {William W.} and Berry, {Daniel J.}",
year = "2017",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.arth.2017.06.032",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "3438--3444",
journal = "Journal of Arthroplasty",
issn = "0883-5403",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Hip Arthroplasty After Surgical Treatment of Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures

AU - Yuan, Brandon J.

AU - Abdel, Matthew

AU - Cross, William W.

AU - Berry, Daniel J.

PY - 2017/11/1

Y1 - 2017/11/1

N2 - Background: Although use of intramedullary hip screws (IMHS) for intertrochanteric (IT) hip fractures has become more common, limited data have suggested difficulties in conversion to hip arthroplasty. The present study investigates whether conversion of failed IT fracture fixation with an intramedullary vs extramedullary device leads to different rates or types of complications or decreased arthroplasty survivorship. Methods: One hundred eleven patients were converted to hip arthroplasty after previous surgical treatment of an IT fracture from 2000 to 2010. Seventy hips had been treated with an extramedullary fixation device (EFD) and 41 with an IMHS. Results: Length of hospital stay and operative times were similar (6 days and 206 minutes for EFD vs 6 days and 208 minutes for IMHS; P >.7). The presence of a Trendelenburg gait at last clinical follow-up was similar between groups (37% in EFD group and 38% in IMHS group). Five-year survivorship free of revision was 95% in the EFD group and 94% in the IMHS group (P = 1.0). The overall complication rate was similar (21% for EFD vs 27% for IMHS; P =.51) between groups. The most common complication was late periprosthetic fracture in the EFD patients (6% vs 0% in IMHS; P =.29) and intraoperative femoral fracture in the IMHS patients (12% vs 1% in EFD; P =.02). Conclusion: The short-term survivorship of conversion hip arthroplasty after surgical treatment of an IT fracture is excellent regardless of original fracture fixation method. If early complications, particularly periprosthetic fractures, can be minimized, the likelihood of a successful outcome is high. The risk of intraoperative femoral fracture was greater during conversion from an IMHS compared to an EFD.

AB - Background: Although use of intramedullary hip screws (IMHS) for intertrochanteric (IT) hip fractures has become more common, limited data have suggested difficulties in conversion to hip arthroplasty. The present study investigates whether conversion of failed IT fracture fixation with an intramedullary vs extramedullary device leads to different rates or types of complications or decreased arthroplasty survivorship. Methods: One hundred eleven patients were converted to hip arthroplasty after previous surgical treatment of an IT fracture from 2000 to 2010. Seventy hips had been treated with an extramedullary fixation device (EFD) and 41 with an IMHS. Results: Length of hospital stay and operative times were similar (6 days and 206 minutes for EFD vs 6 days and 208 minutes for IMHS; P >.7). The presence of a Trendelenburg gait at last clinical follow-up was similar between groups (37% in EFD group and 38% in IMHS group). Five-year survivorship free of revision was 95% in the EFD group and 94% in the IMHS group (P = 1.0). The overall complication rate was similar (21% for EFD vs 27% for IMHS; P =.51) between groups. The most common complication was late periprosthetic fracture in the EFD patients (6% vs 0% in IMHS; P =.29) and intraoperative femoral fracture in the IMHS patients (12% vs 1% in EFD; P =.02). Conclusion: The short-term survivorship of conversion hip arthroplasty after surgical treatment of an IT fracture is excellent regardless of original fracture fixation method. If early complications, particularly periprosthetic fractures, can be minimized, the likelihood of a successful outcome is high. The risk of intraoperative femoral fracture was greater during conversion from an IMHS compared to an EFD.

KW - conversion hip arthroplasty

KW - hip arthroplasty

KW - hip fracture

KW - intertrochanteric hip fracture

KW - periprosthetic fracture

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85023632149&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85023632149&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.arth.2017.06.032

DO - 10.1016/j.arth.2017.06.032

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 3438

EP - 3444

JO - Journal of Arthroplasty

JF - Journal of Arthroplasty

SN - 0883-5403

IS - 11

ER -