De Marco Davide, Messina Federica, Meschini Cesare, Oliva Maria Serena, Rovere Giuseppe, Maccagnano Giuseppe, Noia Giovanni, Maccauro Giulio, Ziranu Antonio
Department of Orthopaedics, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Roma.
Orthopaedic and Trauma Unit, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Foggia, Policlinico Riuniti di Foggia.
Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2022 Apr 25;14(2):33772. doi: 10.52965/001c.33772. eCollection 2022.
The incidence of periprosthetic fractures of distal femur (PPDFFx) after primary total knee arthroplasties is described around 0.3% and 2.5% and it is increasing as the number of patients with total knee arthroplasty continues to arise. surgical options treatments for PPDFFx include fixation in the form of eather Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), or retrograde intramedullary nailing (RIMN), or conventional (non locked) plating, or locked plating such as the Less Invasive Stabilization System (LISS), or dynamic condylar screws. In recent years, however, the use of megaprostheses has been increasing. Patients with periprosthetic fractures of distal femur after primary total knee arthroplasties treated with ORIF or with the use of Distal femur replacement (DFR) were retrospectively analyzed in this to evaluate differences in intra-operative blood loss, need of blood trasfusion, weight bearing, range of motion, rate of complications, rate of revision surgery and functional outcome according Oxford Knee Score between two groups. Treatment of Periprosthetic distal femur fracture remains controversial. While ORIF seems to guarantee less percentage of complications and reoperation rate, those treated with megaprosthesis seem to gain better range of motion in a very short post-operative time. In the future it will be necessary to investigate with greater numbers possible advantages and disadvantages of the various treatments in periprosthetic distal femur fractures.
初次全膝关节置换术后股骨远端假体周围骨折(PPDFFx)的发生率据描述在0.3%至2.5%之间,并且随着全膝关节置换患者数量的持续增加而上升。PPDFFx的手术治疗选择包括切开复位内固定(ORIF)、逆行髓内钉固定(RIMN)、传统(非锁定)钢板固定、锁定钢板固定如微创稳定系统(LISS)或动力髁螺钉固定等形式。然而,近年来,大假体的使用一直在增加。本研究对初次全膝关节置换术后股骨远端假体周围骨折患者采用ORIF或股骨远端置换(DFR)治疗进行回顾性分析,以评估两组在术中失血、输血需求、负重、活动范围、并发症发生率、翻修手术率以及根据牛津膝关节评分的功能结局方面的差异。股骨远端假体周围骨折的治疗仍存在争议。虽然ORIF似乎能保证较低的并发症发生率和再次手术率,但接受大假体治疗的患者在术后很短时间内似乎能获得更好的活动范围。未来有必要对股骨远端假体周围骨折的各种治疗方法的更多潜在优缺点进行研究。