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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rupp, Markus, Kern, Stefanie, Ismat, Abdullah, El Khassawna, Thaqif, Knapp, Gero, Szalay, Gabor, Heiss, Christian, Biehl, Christoph
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