Treatment of Periprosthetic Nonunions of the Lower Extremity

Tibial periprosthetic fractures in Total Knee Arthroplasty - A scoping review

Background

Periprosthetic tibial fractures in Total Knee Arthroplasty are much less commonly seen than femoral fractures, and there is a paucity of available literature and management recommendation for these fractures. We aimed to identify the relevant and up-to-date literature on this subject to analyse the incidence, risk factors, and management recommendations.

Methods

A literature search was done on the databases of PubMed and SCOPUS using appropriate keywords. All the published literature in the English language was included for this review.

Results

We included 21 studies comprising 260 tibial periprosthetic fractures (91 intra-operative (35%) and 169 (65%) post-operative or delayed fractures). Only 5.9% of these fractures were managed conservatively. Whereas 98 cases (58%) were managed with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with plating, 19 (11.2%) were managed with revision TKA. Seventeen cases (10%) were managed with minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO), and 8 (4.7%) were managed with intramedullary nailing. Less than 6% of cases were managed with other means, viz. megaprosthesis (n = 4), arthrodesis (n = 5), amputation (n = 1), and external fixator (n = 1).

Conclusion

Intraoperative fractures accounted for one-third of the fractures in our review. A majority of the delayed periprosthetic fractures were treated with surgical intervention. The most preferred surgical treatment method was ORIF of fractures using locking plates (either open or MIPPO). Revision TKA or megaprosthesis was used in cases with the loosened implants in association with the fracture.

Level of evidence

IV.

The Efficacy of Rehabilitation Nursing Interventions on Patients with Open Lower Limb Fractures

Objective

The study aims to analyze the efficacy of rehabilitation nursing interventions on patients with open lower limb fractures.

Methods

From June 2020, patients who received RNI (observation group) were included and compared with patients who received routine nursing interventions (control group). The efficacy of different nursing modes was compared with several indicators.

Results

One hundred patients were included in this study, 50 in each group. The baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the groups. Regarding the emotional scores, the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) score (26.98 vs 43.47), and Distress Management Screening Measure (DMSM) score (8.01 vs 12.85) in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group, both P < 0.05. Regarding the postoperative related indexes, the postoperative pain score (10.13 vs 15.53), fracture healing time (6.32 vs 10.86 weeks), and postoperative complications rate (0 vs 12%) in the observation group were all significantly lower than those in the control group, all P < 0.05. Regarding the quality of life scores, the WHOQOL-100 score (94.12 vs 83.13) and PSQI score (6.43 vs 10.36) were both significantly better in the observation group, with both P < 0.05.

Conclusion

Patients with open lower limbs who received RNI can help patients reduce postoperative anxiety and stress, promote postoperative rehabilitation and improve their quality of life.