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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |