Cargando…

Management of Distal Femur Fractures: Replacement Versus Surgical Fixation Versus Conservative Management

Introduction: Distal femur fractures are a frequently encountered injury, especially among the ageing population. Previous studies have identified that these fractures can be managed with a variety of methods and techniques which has led to an ongoing debate and investigation to decipher the optimal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Routledge, Jamie C, Bashir, Oladimeji, Elbeshbeshy, Mohamed, Saber, Ahmed Y, Aqil, Adeel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10577514/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37849599
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.45333
_version_ 1785121342522130432
author Routledge, Jamie C
Bashir, Oladimeji
Elbeshbeshy, Mohamed
Saber, Ahmed Y
Aqil, Adeel
author_facet Routledge, Jamie C
Bashir, Oladimeji
Elbeshbeshy, Mohamed
Saber, Ahmed Y
Aqil, Adeel
author_sort Routledge, Jamie C
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Distal femur fractures are a frequently encountered injury, especially among the ageing population. Previous studies have identified that these fractures can be managed with a variety of methods and techniques which has led to an ongoing debate and investigation to decipher the optimal approach to manage these fractures. Aim: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of patients managed with either distal femur replacements (DFRs), surgical fixation (SF) or conservative management. Outcomes measured included length of hospital stay, readmission rates, 30-day mortality and Oxford Knee Score. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted, of patients admitted with distal femur fractures between June 2020 and October 2022 at Huddersfield Royal Infirmary Hospital. Patients with both native and peri-prosthetic joints were included. All patient's medical data, including imaging and operative records, were reviewed. Results: A total of 42 patients were identified. There were six males and 36 females with a mean age of 78 years, a median age of 76 and a range of 35-102 years. Of these fractures, 15 were peri-prosthetic, and 27 were native joints. Of the patients, 30 had an SF, five had a DFR and the remaining seven were conservatively managed. Those managed with an SF had an average length of stay of 18 days, an Oxford score of 24 and two patients were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. For the DFR, the average length of stay was 16 days, an Oxford score of 22 and no patients were readmitted within 30 days. For the conservatively managed patients 21 days, an Oxford score of 25 and two patients were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. There was no 30-day mortality across all groups. Conclusions: From our study, we can conclude that patients who managed with a DFR had the shortest length of stay in a hospital and the lowest readmission rates when compared to alternative management techniques. There was minimal difference found between the Oxford scores between all three groups. This study shows that DFR can be a safe and reliable strategy to manage distal femur fractures. Additional research is required to further compare the outcomes of these different methods of repair.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10577514
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105775142023-10-17 Management of Distal Femur Fractures: Replacement Versus Surgical Fixation Versus Conservative Management Routledge, Jamie C Bashir, Oladimeji Elbeshbeshy, Mohamed Saber, Ahmed Y Aqil, Adeel Cureus Orthopedics Introduction: Distal femur fractures are a frequently encountered injury, especially among the ageing population. Previous studies have identified that these fractures can be managed with a variety of methods and techniques which has led to an ongoing debate and investigation to decipher the optimal approach to manage these fractures. Aim: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of patients managed with either distal femur replacements (DFRs), surgical fixation (SF) or conservative management. Outcomes measured included length of hospital stay, readmission rates, 30-day mortality and Oxford Knee Score. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted, of patients admitted with distal femur fractures between June 2020 and October 2022 at Huddersfield Royal Infirmary Hospital. Patients with both native and peri-prosthetic joints were included. All patient's medical data, including imaging and operative records, were reviewed. Results: A total of 42 patients were identified. There were six males and 36 females with a mean age of 78 years, a median age of 76 and a range of 35-102 years. Of these fractures, 15 were peri-prosthetic, and 27 were native joints. Of the patients, 30 had an SF, five had a DFR and the remaining seven were conservatively managed. Those managed with an SF had an average length of stay of 18 days, an Oxford score of 24 and two patients were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. For the DFR, the average length of stay was 16 days, an Oxford score of 22 and no patients were readmitted within 30 days. For the conservatively managed patients 21 days, an Oxford score of 25 and two patients were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. There was no 30-day mortality across all groups. Conclusions: From our study, we can conclude that patients who managed with a DFR had the shortest length of stay in a hospital and the lowest readmission rates when compared to alternative management techniques. There was minimal difference found between the Oxford scores between all three groups. This study shows that DFR can be a safe and reliable strategy to manage distal femur fractures. Additional research is required to further compare the outcomes of these different methods of repair. Cureus 2023-09-16 /pmc/articles/PMC10577514/ /pubmed/37849599 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.45333 Text en Copyright © 2023, Routledge et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Orthopedics
Routledge, Jamie C
Bashir, Oladimeji
Elbeshbeshy, Mohamed
Saber, Ahmed Y
Aqil, Adeel
Management of Distal Femur Fractures: Replacement Versus Surgical Fixation Versus Conservative Management
title Management of Distal Femur Fractures: Replacement Versus Surgical Fixation Versus Conservative Management
title_full Management of Distal Femur Fractures: Replacement Versus Surgical Fixation Versus Conservative Management
title_fullStr Management of Distal Femur Fractures: Replacement Versus Surgical Fixation Versus Conservative Management
title_full_unstemmed Management of Distal Femur Fractures: Replacement Versus Surgical Fixation Versus Conservative Management
title_short Management of Distal Femur Fractures: Replacement Versus Surgical Fixation Versus Conservative Management
title_sort management of distal femur fractures: replacement versus surgical fixation versus conservative management
topic Orthopedics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10577514/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37849599
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.45333
work_keys_str_mv AT routledgejamiec managementofdistalfemurfracturesreplacementversussurgicalfixationversusconservativemanagement
AT bashiroladimeji managementofdistalfemurfracturesreplacementversussurgicalfixationversusconservativemanagement
AT elbeshbeshymohamed managementofdistalfemurfracturesreplacementversussurgicalfixationversusconservativemanagement
AT saberahmedy managementofdistalfemurfracturesreplacementversussurgicalfixationversusconservativemanagement
AT aqiladeel managementofdistalfemurfracturesreplacementversussurgicalfixationversusconservativemanagement