Mondanelli Nicola, Troiano Elisa, Facchini Andrea, Cesari Martina, Colasanti Giovanni Battista, Bottai Vanna, Muratori Francesco, Caffarelli Carla, Gonnelli Stefano, Giannotti Stefano
Department of Medicine Surgery and Neurosciences, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.
Section of Orthopedics, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Senese, Policlinico Santa Maria alle Scotte, Siena, Italy.
Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil. 2021 Dec 21;12:21514593211067072. doi: 10.1177/21514593211067072. eCollection 2021.
There is lack of consensus regarding best operative fixation strategy for periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) around a stable stem. Evidence exists that some patterns of fracture around a stable stem are better treated with revision surgery than with standard fixation. Anyway, a more aggressive surgical procedure together with medical treatment could allow for stem retention, and reduced risk of nonunion/hardware failure, even in these cases.
This paper is placed in a broader context of lack of studies on the matter, and its aim is to shed some light on the management of PFFs around a stable stem, when peculiar mechanical and biological aspects are present.
Based on our casuistry in the treatment of nonunions after PFF successfully treated with original stem retention, and on review of Literature about risk factors for fixation failure, an algorithm is proposed that can guide in choosing the ideal surgical technique even for first-time PFFs with a stable stem, without resorting to revision. Mechanical (major and minor) and biological (local and systemic) factors that may influence fracture healing, leading to nonunion and hardware failure, and subsequent need for re-operation, are considered. The proposed surgical technique consists of rigid fixation with absolute stability (using a plate and structural allograft) plus local biological support (structural allograft and autologous bone marrow concentrate over a platelet-rich plasma-based scaffold) at fracture site. Systemic anabolic treatment (Teriparatide) is also administered in the post-operative period.
Mechanical factors are not the only issues to be considered when choosing the surgical approach to PFFs over a stable stem. Systemic and local biological conditions should be taken into account, as well. A therapeutic algorithm is proposed, given the prosthetic stem to be stable, considering mechanical and biological criteria.
对于稳定股骨柄周围的假体周围股骨骨折(PFF),最佳手术固定策略尚无共识。有证据表明,稳定股骨柄周围的某些骨折模式采用翻修手术比标准固定治疗效果更好。无论如何,即使在这些情况下,更积极的手术操作与药物治疗相结合也可以保留股骨柄,并降低骨不连/内固定失败的风险。
本文置于对此问题缺乏研究的更广泛背景下,其目的是在存在特殊力学和生物学因素时,阐明稳定股骨柄周围PFF的处理方法。
基于我们成功采用原股骨柄保留治疗PFF后骨不连的病例情况,以及对固定失败危险因素的文献回顾,提出了一种算法,即使对于初次发生的稳定股骨柄PFF,也可指导选择理想的手术技术,而无需进行翻修。考虑了可能影响骨折愈合、导致骨不连和内固定失败以及随后需要再次手术的力学(主要和次要)和生物学(局部和全身)因素。所提出的手术技术包括在骨折部位采用绝对稳定性的坚强固定(使用钢板和结构性同种异体骨)加局部生物学支持(结构性同种异体骨和基于富血小板血浆支架的自体骨髓浓缩物)。术后还给予全身促合成代谢治疗(特立帕肽)。
在选择稳定股骨柄周围PFF的手术方法时,力学因素并非唯一需要考虑的问题。还应考虑全身和局部生物学状况。鉴于假体柄稳定,考虑力学和生物学标准,提出了一种治疗算法。