Cargando…
The PFNA® Augmented in Revision Surgery of Proximal Femur Fractures
OBJECTIVES: Modern implants for proximal femur fracture treatment have clearly improved clinical results. However, complications, including cut-out and loss of reduction, requiring revision surgery still occur. A major challenge in these cases is a loss of bone stock due to the existing implant, whi...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Bentham Open
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4136372/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25136390 http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874325001408010232 |
_version_ | 1782330995193675776 |
---|---|
author | Scola, Alexander Gebhard, Florian Dehner, Christoph Röderer, Götz |
author_facet | Scola, Alexander Gebhard, Florian Dehner, Christoph Röderer, Götz |
author_sort | Scola, Alexander |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: Modern implants for proximal femur fracture treatment have clearly improved clinical results. However, complications, including cut-out and loss of reduction, requiring revision surgery still occur. A major challenge in these cases is a loss of bone stock due to the existing implant, which is usually exacerbated by osteoporosis. A potential solution is the augmentation of implants, for example, of the femoral neck blade using bone cement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten patients (five loosening of femoral neck implant, two pseudarthrosis, two implant failures and one acute fracture) were included. The initial hardware was removed and a PFNA augmented was implanted. The perforated femoral neck blade was augmented using polymethyl methacrylate cement. Clinical and radiological follow-up was performed at a mean of 5.4 months (SD ±4.34). The main outcome parameters were fracture healing and implant-related complications. RESULTS: Technical handling was uneventful in all cases. No cement leakage into the joint occurred in any of the cases. The mean amount of cement injected was 5.3 ml. The fracture healed during follow-up in all cases except two patients who died from causes unrelated to the procedure and prior to complete consolidation. Problem-free elective hardware removal of the PFNA augmented was performed in two cases. DISCUSSION: The PFNA augmented is a potential implant for joint-preserving revision surgery in proximal femur fractures. The augmentation improves implant anchorage in the impaired bone stock. In this preliminary series, no negative biological side effects of the cement (i.e. osteonecrosis) were observed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4136372 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Bentham Open |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-41363722014-08-18 The PFNA® Augmented in Revision Surgery of Proximal Femur Fractures Scola, Alexander Gebhard, Florian Dehner, Christoph Röderer, Götz Open Orthop J Article OBJECTIVES: Modern implants for proximal femur fracture treatment have clearly improved clinical results. However, complications, including cut-out and loss of reduction, requiring revision surgery still occur. A major challenge in these cases is a loss of bone stock due to the existing implant, which is usually exacerbated by osteoporosis. A potential solution is the augmentation of implants, for example, of the femoral neck blade using bone cement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten patients (five loosening of femoral neck implant, two pseudarthrosis, two implant failures and one acute fracture) were included. The initial hardware was removed and a PFNA augmented was implanted. The perforated femoral neck blade was augmented using polymethyl methacrylate cement. Clinical and radiological follow-up was performed at a mean of 5.4 months (SD ±4.34). The main outcome parameters were fracture healing and implant-related complications. RESULTS: Technical handling was uneventful in all cases. No cement leakage into the joint occurred in any of the cases. The mean amount of cement injected was 5.3 ml. The fracture healed during follow-up in all cases except two patients who died from causes unrelated to the procedure and prior to complete consolidation. Problem-free elective hardware removal of the PFNA augmented was performed in two cases. DISCUSSION: The PFNA augmented is a potential implant for joint-preserving revision surgery in proximal femur fractures. The augmentation improves implant anchorage in the impaired bone stock. In this preliminary series, no negative biological side effects of the cement (i.e. osteonecrosis) were observed. Bentham Open 2014-07-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4136372/ /pubmed/25136390 http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874325001408010232 Text en © Scola et al.; Licensee Bentham Open. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Article Scola, Alexander Gebhard, Florian Dehner, Christoph Röderer, Götz The PFNA® Augmented in Revision Surgery of Proximal Femur Fractures |
title | The PFNA® Augmented in Revision Surgery of Proximal Femur Fractures |
title_full | The PFNA® Augmented in Revision Surgery of Proximal Femur Fractures |
title_fullStr | The PFNA® Augmented in Revision Surgery of Proximal Femur Fractures |
title_full_unstemmed | The PFNA® Augmented in Revision Surgery of Proximal Femur Fractures |
title_short | The PFNA® Augmented in Revision Surgery of Proximal Femur Fractures |
title_sort | pfna® augmented in revision surgery of proximal femur fractures |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4136372/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25136390 http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874325001408010232 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT scolaalexander thepfnaaugmentedinrevisionsurgeryofproximalfemurfractures AT gebhardflorian thepfnaaugmentedinrevisionsurgeryofproximalfemurfractures AT dehnerchristoph thepfnaaugmentedinrevisionsurgeryofproximalfemurfractures AT roderergotz thepfnaaugmentedinrevisionsurgeryofproximalfemurfractures AT scolaalexander pfnaaugmentedinrevisionsurgeryofproximalfemurfractures AT gebhardflorian pfnaaugmentedinrevisionsurgeryofproximalfemurfractures AT dehnerchristoph pfnaaugmentedinrevisionsurgeryofproximalfemurfractures AT roderergotz pfnaaugmentedinrevisionsurgeryofproximalfemurfractures |