Cargando…

Metallic versus Non-Metallic Cerclage Cables System in Periprosthetic Hip Fracture Treatment: Single-Institution Experience at a Minimum 1-Year Follow-Up

Metallic cerclage cables are reliable and cost-effective internal fixation devices, which are largely used in surgical practice for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures. Nevertheless, complications connected with their use have been described in the literature, including the following: third-bo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Speranza, Attilio, Massafra, Carlo, Pecchia, Stefano, Di Niccolo, Riccardo, Iorio, Raffaele, Ferretti, Andrea
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8949985/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35329933
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11061608
_version_ 1784675034938212352
author Speranza, Attilio
Massafra, Carlo
Pecchia, Stefano
Di Niccolo, Riccardo
Iorio, Raffaele
Ferretti, Andrea
author_facet Speranza, Attilio
Massafra, Carlo
Pecchia, Stefano
Di Niccolo, Riccardo
Iorio, Raffaele
Ferretti, Andrea
author_sort Speranza, Attilio
collection PubMed
description Metallic cerclage cables are reliable and cost-effective internal fixation devices, which are largely used in surgical practice for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures. Nevertheless, complications connected with their use have been described in the literature, including the following: third-body generation, failure and consequent migration, fraying, allergies, and injury to the surgical team. The development of new materials offers alternatives to traditional metallic cables. This study compares the outcomes between two groups of patients affected by periprosthetic hip fractures, treated with titanium cables or with ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPe) iso-elastic cables. Our retrospective study aims to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of titanium cables and UHMWPe iso-elastic cables, isolated or associated with dedicated plates, for the surgical treatment of periprosthetic fractures with stable implants. Two groups of 30 (group A—metallic cables) and 24 (group B—UHMWPe iso-elastic cables) patients have been surgically treated in our institution for hip periprosthetic fractures, between September 2017 and June 2020. The mean age of the patients was 81 years in group A and 80 years in group B. In our study, we included fractures classified as B1 or C, according to the Vancouver postoperative fractures classification; the patients were evaluated retrospectively at 1 year postoperatively, regarding the following: surgery time, blood loss, partial weight-bearing time, radiographical healing time, Harris hip score, and postoperative complications. Comparable outcomes were observed in patients from both groups. Group A showed a higher complication rate compared to group B, at 1 year postoperatively. Non-metallic nylon fiber and ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPe) cerclage cables could represent a reliable fixation device, ensuring comparable healing and complication rates with traditional titanium cerclage cables.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8949985
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89499852022-03-26 Metallic versus Non-Metallic Cerclage Cables System in Periprosthetic Hip Fracture Treatment: Single-Institution Experience at a Minimum 1-Year Follow-Up Speranza, Attilio Massafra, Carlo Pecchia, Stefano Di Niccolo, Riccardo Iorio, Raffaele Ferretti, Andrea J Clin Med Article Metallic cerclage cables are reliable and cost-effective internal fixation devices, which are largely used in surgical practice for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures. Nevertheless, complications connected with their use have been described in the literature, including the following: third-body generation, failure and consequent migration, fraying, allergies, and injury to the surgical team. The development of new materials offers alternatives to traditional metallic cables. This study compares the outcomes between two groups of patients affected by periprosthetic hip fractures, treated with titanium cables or with ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPe) iso-elastic cables. Our retrospective study aims to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of titanium cables and UHMWPe iso-elastic cables, isolated or associated with dedicated plates, for the surgical treatment of periprosthetic fractures with stable implants. Two groups of 30 (group A—metallic cables) and 24 (group B—UHMWPe iso-elastic cables) patients have been surgically treated in our institution for hip periprosthetic fractures, between September 2017 and June 2020. The mean age of the patients was 81 years in group A and 80 years in group B. In our study, we included fractures classified as B1 or C, according to the Vancouver postoperative fractures classification; the patients were evaluated retrospectively at 1 year postoperatively, regarding the following: surgery time, blood loss, partial weight-bearing time, radiographical healing time, Harris hip score, and postoperative complications. Comparable outcomes were observed in patients from both groups. Group A showed a higher complication rate compared to group B, at 1 year postoperatively. Non-metallic nylon fiber and ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPe) cerclage cables could represent a reliable fixation device, ensuring comparable healing and complication rates with traditional titanium cerclage cables. MDPI 2022-03-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8949985/ /pubmed/35329933 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11061608 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Speranza, Attilio
Massafra, Carlo
Pecchia, Stefano
Di Niccolo, Riccardo
Iorio, Raffaele
Ferretti, Andrea
Metallic versus Non-Metallic Cerclage Cables System in Periprosthetic Hip Fracture Treatment: Single-Institution Experience at a Minimum 1-Year Follow-Up
title Metallic versus Non-Metallic Cerclage Cables System in Periprosthetic Hip Fracture Treatment: Single-Institution Experience at a Minimum 1-Year Follow-Up
title_full Metallic versus Non-Metallic Cerclage Cables System in Periprosthetic Hip Fracture Treatment: Single-Institution Experience at a Minimum 1-Year Follow-Up
title_fullStr Metallic versus Non-Metallic Cerclage Cables System in Periprosthetic Hip Fracture Treatment: Single-Institution Experience at a Minimum 1-Year Follow-Up
title_full_unstemmed Metallic versus Non-Metallic Cerclage Cables System in Periprosthetic Hip Fracture Treatment: Single-Institution Experience at a Minimum 1-Year Follow-Up
title_short Metallic versus Non-Metallic Cerclage Cables System in Periprosthetic Hip Fracture Treatment: Single-Institution Experience at a Minimum 1-Year Follow-Up
title_sort metallic versus non-metallic cerclage cables system in periprosthetic hip fracture treatment: single-institution experience at a minimum 1-year follow-up
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8949985/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35329933
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11061608
work_keys_str_mv AT speranzaattilio metallicversusnonmetalliccerclagecablessysteminperiprosthetichipfracturetreatmentsingleinstitutionexperienceataminimum1yearfollowup
AT massafracarlo metallicversusnonmetalliccerclagecablessysteminperiprosthetichipfracturetreatmentsingleinstitutionexperienceataminimum1yearfollowup
AT pecchiastefano metallicversusnonmetalliccerclagecablessysteminperiprosthetichipfracturetreatmentsingleinstitutionexperienceataminimum1yearfollowup
AT diniccoloriccardo metallicversusnonmetalliccerclagecablessysteminperiprosthetichipfracturetreatmentsingleinstitutionexperienceataminimum1yearfollowup
AT iorioraffaele metallicversusnonmetalliccerclagecablessysteminperiprosthetichipfracturetreatmentsingleinstitutionexperienceataminimum1yearfollowup
AT ferrettiandrea metallicversusnonmetalliccerclagecablessysteminperiprosthetichipfracturetreatmentsingleinstitutionexperienceataminimum1yearfollowup