Acute total hip arthroplasty versus open reduction internal fixation for posterior wall acetabular fractures in middle-aged patients.

INTRODUCTION

Open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) is the standard of care for displaced acetabular fractures, but the inability to achieve anatomic reduction, involvement of the posterior wall, articular impaction, and femoral head cartilaginous injury are known to lead to poorer outcomes. Acute total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a reasonable treatment option for older patients with an acetabular fracture and risk factors for a poor outcome, but it is only described in case series. The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes of ORIF and acute THA in middle-aged patients with an acetabular fracture from a single center.

METHODS

Retrospective case-controlled study of patients aged 45 to 65 years old with acetabular fractures involving the posterior wall treated with acute THA or ORIF at a level 1 trauma center between 1996 and 2011. Patients were matched by fracture pattern and age at a 2 (ORIF):1 (acute THA) ratio. Functional outcome, complications, and reoperation rates of acute THA and ORIF were compared.

RESULTS

Sixteen acute THA patients (average age 56.4 years) and 32 ORIF patients (average age 54.3 years) were evaluated at an average follow-up of 6.2 years (range 1-15.2). The average Oxford Hip Score in the acute THA group was 44 compared to 40 in the ORIF group (P = .075). Complication rates were similar between both the groups. Twelve hips (37%) in the ORIF group had undergone THA or been referred for THA, and 2 revisions (13%) had occurred in the acute THA group. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that those undergoing acute THA had significantly better survival of their index procedure (.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Both ORIF and acute THA for high-energy acetabular fractures involving the posterior wall in middle-aged patients can provide excellent results, with acute THA patients achieving improved survival of the index procedure and improved functional scores.