Cargando…
Computed tomography for managing periprosthetic femoral fractures. A retrospective analysis
BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic fractures (PPF) present a common cause for revision surgery after arthroplasty. The choice of performing either an osteosynthesis or revision arthroplasty depends on the orthopedic implant anchored and loosening. Standard diagnostics include x-ray imaging. CT is usually pe...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6540448/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31138187 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-019-2632-y |
_version_ | 1783422620086042624 |
---|---|
author | Rupp, Markus Kern, Stefanie Ismat, Abdullah El Khassawna, Thaqif Knapp, Gero Szalay, Gabor Heiss, Christian Biehl, Christoph |
author_facet | Rupp, Markus Kern, Stefanie Ismat, Abdullah El Khassawna, Thaqif Knapp, Gero Szalay, Gabor Heiss, Christian Biehl, Christoph |
author_sort | Rupp, Markus |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic fractures (PPF) present a common cause for revision surgery after arthroplasty. The choice of performing either an osteosynthesis or revision arthroplasty depends on the orthopedic implant anchored and loosening. Standard diagnostics include x-ray imaging. CT is usually performed to confirm implant loosening in case of ambiguous diagnosis on standard x-ray imaging. This study aimed to examine the role of CT as a diagnostic modality and its implications for treatment planning and outcome. METHODS: Patients treated for PPF from January 2010 to February 2018 were included. X-ray and CT reports were analyzed to assess implant loosening. The planning for surgery and the final surgical treatment were evaluated. In addition, patient characteristics were analyzed and compared between patients with and without additional CT as a preoperative diagnostic procedure. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were eligible for the study. X-ray imaging was performed in 90.7% of cases. CT was performed in 60% of the cases as part of the preoperative diagnostic. A clear statement on implant stability or loosening could not be made in 69.1% after X-ray imaging and in 84.4% following CT imaging. Revision arthroplasty for loosened femoral prosthesis components was necessary in 40% of cases. No difference could be determined comparing patients with X-ray imaging to those with X-ray and additional CT. In both groups, operative treatment did not deviate from the preoperative planning. DISCUSSION: In two thirds of the conventional radiographic findings, no reliable evaluation of implant loosening was possible in femoral PPFs. Intriguingly, additional CT did not improve the evaluation of implant loosening. Nonetheless, CT scans are often performed if loosening assessment is unclear on regular radiographs. This fact can explain the bias CT results in comparison to regular radiography. However, software-supported CT diagnosis could help to adequately answer the question of loosened implants in PPF in the near future. Since the diagnosis of fracture and their morphology assessment is currently adequately performed using X-rays, CT shall not be considered as the gold standard. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6540448 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65404482019-06-03 Computed tomography for managing periprosthetic femoral fractures. A retrospective analysis Rupp, Markus Kern, Stefanie Ismat, Abdullah El Khassawna, Thaqif Knapp, Gero Szalay, Gabor Heiss, Christian Biehl, Christoph BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic fractures (PPF) present a common cause for revision surgery after arthroplasty. The choice of performing either an osteosynthesis or revision arthroplasty depends on the orthopedic implant anchored and loosening. Standard diagnostics include x-ray imaging. CT is usually performed to confirm implant loosening in case of ambiguous diagnosis on standard x-ray imaging. This study aimed to examine the role of CT as a diagnostic modality and its implications for treatment planning and outcome. METHODS: Patients treated for PPF from January 2010 to February 2018 were included. X-ray and CT reports were analyzed to assess implant loosening. The planning for surgery and the final surgical treatment were evaluated. In addition, patient characteristics were analyzed and compared between patients with and without additional CT as a preoperative diagnostic procedure. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were eligible for the study. X-ray imaging was performed in 90.7% of cases. CT was performed in 60% of the cases as part of the preoperative diagnostic. A clear statement on implant stability or loosening could not be made in 69.1% after X-ray imaging and in 84.4% following CT imaging. Revision arthroplasty for loosened femoral prosthesis components was necessary in 40% of cases. No difference could be determined comparing patients with X-ray imaging to those with X-ray and additional CT. In both groups, operative treatment did not deviate from the preoperative planning. DISCUSSION: In two thirds of the conventional radiographic findings, no reliable evaluation of implant loosening was possible in femoral PPFs. Intriguingly, additional CT did not improve the evaluation of implant loosening. Nonetheless, CT scans are often performed if loosening assessment is unclear on regular radiographs. This fact can explain the bias CT results in comparison to regular radiography. However, software-supported CT diagnosis could help to adequately answer the question of loosened implants in PPF in the near future. Since the diagnosis of fracture and their morphology assessment is currently adequately performed using X-rays, CT shall not be considered as the gold standard. BioMed Central 2019-05-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6540448/ /pubmed/31138187 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-019-2632-y Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Rupp, Markus Kern, Stefanie Ismat, Abdullah El Khassawna, Thaqif Knapp, Gero Szalay, Gabor Heiss, Christian Biehl, Christoph Computed tomography for managing periprosthetic femoral fractures. A retrospective analysis |
title | Computed tomography for managing periprosthetic femoral fractures. A retrospective analysis |
title_full | Computed tomography for managing periprosthetic femoral fractures. A retrospective analysis |
title_fullStr | Computed tomography for managing periprosthetic femoral fractures. A retrospective analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Computed tomography for managing periprosthetic femoral fractures. A retrospective analysis |
title_short | Computed tomography for managing periprosthetic femoral fractures. A retrospective analysis |
title_sort | computed tomography for managing periprosthetic femoral fractures. a retrospective analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6540448/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31138187 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-019-2632-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ruppmarkus computedtomographyformanagingperiprostheticfemoralfracturesaretrospectiveanalysis AT kernstefanie computedtomographyformanagingperiprostheticfemoralfracturesaretrospectiveanalysis AT ismatabdullah computedtomographyformanagingperiprostheticfemoralfracturesaretrospectiveanalysis AT elkhassawnathaqif computedtomographyformanagingperiprostheticfemoralfracturesaretrospectiveanalysis AT knappgero computedtomographyformanagingperiprostheticfemoralfracturesaretrospectiveanalysis AT szalaygabor computedtomographyformanagingperiprostheticfemoralfracturesaretrospectiveanalysis AT heisschristian computedtomographyformanagingperiprostheticfemoralfracturesaretrospectiveanalysis AT biehlchristoph computedtomographyformanagingperiprostheticfemoralfracturesaretrospectiveanalysis |