Department of Orthopaedics and Orthopaedic Oncology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
First Department of Orthopaedics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, Greece.
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2021 Oct;31(7):1345-1354. doi: 10.1007/s00590-021-02873-w. Epub 2021 Jan 26.
Double ipsilateral femoral fractures account for 1-9% of femoral fractures. There is no clear advantage between single or double implant osteosynthesis. We present a series of patients with double ipsilateral femoral fractures, to address the challenges in treatment, namely the implants for osteosynthesis and complications of treatment.
We retrospectively studied 16 patients (7 men, 9 women; mean age, 51 years) treated from January 2015 to December 2018. Motor vehicle accidents were the leading cause of injury. Types of fractures were pertrochanteric and shaft (6), pertrochanteric and distal (2), double shaft (3), neck and shaft (2), neck and distal (1), shaft and distal (1), and triple fracture including a pertrochanteric, shaft and distal (1). In five patients, two different implants were used (plate and screws, cannulated hip screws, femoral nail), whereas in 11 patients a long femoral nail was used.
Fourteen patients experienced union at a mean of 3 months (2-6 months). Two patients experienced nonunion: both had plate and screws osteosynthesis. One patient died 15 days after admission from polytrauma and another patient experienced central venous catheter thrombosis and pneumonia. Surgical complications (2 patients) included a thigh skin necrosis, and external fixator pin tract infection/infected non-union. Weight-bearing was delayed in all patients; full weight-bearing was allowed in 11 patients at 4 months postoperatively, and in four patients at 5 months.
Due to the rarity and the difficulty of standardization of double ipsilateral femoral fractures, there is variable information on the optimal osteosynthesis of the fractures and the outcome of the patients. It seems that closed reduction and long hip nailing is the treatment of choice, with few complications.
双侧股骨同时骨折占股骨骨折的 1-9%。单枚或双枚植入物固定的治疗效果没有明显优势。我们报告了一组双侧股骨同时骨折的患者,旨在探讨治疗中遇到的挑战,包括内固定植入物的选择以及治疗相关并发症。
我们回顾性研究了自 2015 年 1 月至 2018 年 12 月收治的 16 例患者(7 例男性,9 例女性;平均年龄 51 岁)。致伤原因主要为机动车事故。骨折类型包括股骨粗隆间骨折合并股骨干骨折(6 例)、股骨粗隆间骨折合并股骨干下段骨折(2 例)、双股骨干骨折(3 例)、股骨颈骨折合并股骨干骨折(2 例)、股骨颈骨折合并股骨干下段骨折(1 例)、股骨干骨折合并股骨干下段骨折(1 例)、三部分骨折(包括股骨粗隆间、股骨干、股骨干下段骨折)1 例。其中 5 例患者使用了两种不同的植入物(钢板螺钉、空心加压螺钉、股骨近端髓内钉),11 例患者使用了长型股骨近端髓内钉。
14 例患者骨折愈合,平均愈合时间为 3 个月(2-6 个月)。2 例患者发生骨不连,均采用钢板螺钉固定。1 例患者因多发伤入院后 15 天死亡,另 1 例患者发生中心静脉导管血栓形成和肺炎。2 例患者发生手术相关并发症(大腿皮肤坏死,外固定架针道感染/不愈合)。所有患者均延迟负重,11 例患者术后 4 个月、4 例患者术后 5 个月完全负重。
由于双侧股骨同时骨折的罕见性和标准化治疗的难度,关于骨折的最佳内固定方法和患者预后的信息存在差异。闭合复位和长型髋部髓内钉似乎是治疗的首选方法,并发症较少。