Cargando…

The impact of stem fixation method on Vancouver Type B1 periprosthetic femoral fracture management

Introduction: Our understanding of the impact of the stem fixation method in total hip arthroplasty (THA) on the subsequent management of periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFF) is still limited. This study aimed to investigate and quantify the effect of the stem fixation method, i.e., cemented vs. u...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Katherine, Kenanidis, Eustathios, Gamie, Zakareya, Suleman, Khurram, Miodownik, Mark, Avadi, Mahsa, Horne, David, Thompson, Jonathan, Tsiridis, Eleftherios, Moazen, Mehran
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: EDP Sciences 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8734436/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34989673
http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2021064
_version_ 1784628019983286272
author Wang, Katherine
Kenanidis, Eustathios
Gamie, Zakareya
Suleman, Khurram
Miodownik, Mark
Avadi, Mahsa
Horne, David
Thompson, Jonathan
Tsiridis, Eleftherios
Moazen, Mehran
author_facet Wang, Katherine
Kenanidis, Eustathios
Gamie, Zakareya
Suleman, Khurram
Miodownik, Mark
Avadi, Mahsa
Horne, David
Thompson, Jonathan
Tsiridis, Eleftherios
Moazen, Mehran
author_sort Wang, Katherine
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Our understanding of the impact of the stem fixation method in total hip arthroplasty (THA) on the subsequent management of periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFF) is still limited. This study aimed to investigate and quantify the effect of the stem fixation method, i.e., cemented vs. uncemented THA, on the management of Vancouver Type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures with the same plate. Methods: Eight laboratory models of synthetic femora were divided into two groups and implanted with either a cemented or uncemented hip prosthesis. The overall stiffness and strain distribution were measured under an anatomical one-legged stance. All eight specimens underwent an osteotomy to simulate Vancouver type B1 PFF’s. Fractures were then fixed using the same extramedullary plate and screws. The same measurements and fracture movement were taken under the same loading conditions. Results: Highlighted that the uncemented THA and PFF fixation constructs had a lower overall stiffness. Subsequently, the mechanical strain on the fracture plate for the uncemented construct was higher compared to the cemented constructs. Conclusion: PFF fixation of a Vancouver type B1 fracture using a plate may have a higher risk of failure in uncemented THAs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8734436
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher EDP Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87344362022-02-07 The impact of stem fixation method on Vancouver Type B1 periprosthetic femoral fracture management Wang, Katherine Kenanidis, Eustathios Gamie, Zakareya Suleman, Khurram Miodownik, Mark Avadi, Mahsa Horne, David Thompson, Jonathan Tsiridis, Eleftherios Moazen, Mehran SICOT J Original Article Introduction: Our understanding of the impact of the stem fixation method in total hip arthroplasty (THA) on the subsequent management of periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFF) is still limited. This study aimed to investigate and quantify the effect of the stem fixation method, i.e., cemented vs. uncemented THA, on the management of Vancouver Type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures with the same plate. Methods: Eight laboratory models of synthetic femora were divided into two groups and implanted with either a cemented or uncemented hip prosthesis. The overall stiffness and strain distribution were measured under an anatomical one-legged stance. All eight specimens underwent an osteotomy to simulate Vancouver type B1 PFF’s. Fractures were then fixed using the same extramedullary plate and screws. The same measurements and fracture movement were taken under the same loading conditions. Results: Highlighted that the uncemented THA and PFF fixation constructs had a lower overall stiffness. Subsequently, the mechanical strain on the fracture plate for the uncemented construct was higher compared to the cemented constructs. Conclusion: PFF fixation of a Vancouver type B1 fracture using a plate may have a higher risk of failure in uncemented THAs. EDP Sciences 2022-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8734436/ /pubmed/34989673 http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2021064 Text en © The Authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Wang, Katherine
Kenanidis, Eustathios
Gamie, Zakareya
Suleman, Khurram
Miodownik, Mark
Avadi, Mahsa
Horne, David
Thompson, Jonathan
Tsiridis, Eleftherios
Moazen, Mehran
The impact of stem fixation method on Vancouver Type B1 periprosthetic femoral fracture management
title The impact of stem fixation method on Vancouver Type B1 periprosthetic femoral fracture management
title_full The impact of stem fixation method on Vancouver Type B1 periprosthetic femoral fracture management
title_fullStr The impact of stem fixation method on Vancouver Type B1 periprosthetic femoral fracture management
title_full_unstemmed The impact of stem fixation method on Vancouver Type B1 periprosthetic femoral fracture management
title_short The impact of stem fixation method on Vancouver Type B1 periprosthetic femoral fracture management
title_sort impact of stem fixation method on vancouver type b1 periprosthetic femoral fracture management
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8734436/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34989673
http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2021064
work_keys_str_mv AT wangkatherine theimpactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT kenanidiseustathios theimpactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT gamiezakareya theimpactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT sulemankhurram theimpactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT miodownikmark theimpactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT avadimahsa theimpactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT hornedavid theimpactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT thompsonjonathan theimpactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT tsiridiseleftherios theimpactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT moazenmehran theimpactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT wangkatherine impactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT kenanidiseustathios impactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT gamiezakareya impactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT sulemankhurram impactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT miodownikmark impactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT avadimahsa impactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT hornedavid impactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT thompsonjonathan impactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT tsiridiseleftherios impactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement
AT moazenmehran impactofstemfixationmethodonvancouvertypeb1periprostheticfemoralfracturemanagement