Are proximal screws necessary for osteosynthesis of stable-stem periprosthetic femoral fractures fixed with non-locking plate and cable?

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of the cable-plate-cable technique which comprises fixation of the proximal fragment using cable loops without additional proximal screws on the plate for the treatment of stable-stem periprosthetic femoral fractures around hip prostheses.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed Vancouver types B1 and C periprosthetic femoral fractures treated with a dynamic compression plate combined with Dall-Miles cable between 2010 and 2016 at a single institution and followed for at least 12 months. Patients were treated with proximal fragment fixation using cable combined with screws (Group I) or with proximal fragment fixation using cable alone (Group II). Demographic data, fracture types, and clinical and radiological outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients were included (Group I, n = 23 patients; Group II, n = 27). Fracture union was achieved in 49 patients with one case of non-union in Group I and no cases of non-union in Group II. Mean time to union was 5.4 months in Group I and 5.1 months in Group II (P = 0.624). Mean Harris hip score at latest assessment was 69.5 in Group I and 69.4 in Group II (P = 0.919). Regarding complications, there was one deep wound infection, one stem subsidence, and one loss of reduction in Group I, and one stem subsidence in Group II. No significant difference in clinical and radiological outcomes between groups was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The cable-plate-cable technique sufficiently treats Vancouver types B1 and C periprosthetic femoral fractures without use of additional screws in the proximal fragment.

A review of periprosthetic femoral fractures associated with total hip arthroplasty

Periprosthetic fractures of the femur in association with total hip arthroplasty are increasingly common and often difficult to treat. Patients with periprosthetic fractures are typically elderly and frail and have osteoporosis. No clear consensus exists regarding the optimal management strategy because there is limited high-quality research. The Vancouver classification facilitates treatment decisions. In the presence of a stable prosthesis (type-B1 and -C fractures), most authors recommend surgical stabilization of the fracture with plates, strut grafts, or a combination thereof. In up to 20% of apparent Vancouver type-B1 fractures, the femoral stem is loose, which may explain the high failure rates associated with open reduction and internal fixation. Some authors recommend routine opening and dislocation of the hip to perform an intraoperative stem stability test to rule out a loose component. Advances in plating techniques and technology are improving the outcomes for these fractures. For fractures around a loose femoral prosthesis (types B2 and 3), revision using an extensively porous-coated uncemented long stem, with or without additional fracture fixation, appears to offer the most reliable outcome. Cement-in-cement revision using a long-stem prosthesis is feasible in elderly patients with a well-fixed cement mantle. It is essential to treat the osteoporosis to help fracture healing and to prevent further fractures. We provide an overview of the causes, classification, and management of periprosthetic femoral fractures around a total hip arthroplasty based on the current best available evidence.