Shah Jay K, Abwini Laith Z, Tang Alex, Yang Jason I, Keller David M, Menken Luke G, Liporace Frank A, Yoon Richard S
Division of Orthopaedic Trauma & Adult Reconstruction, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cooperman Barnabas Medical Center/Jersey City Medical Center-RWJBarnabas Health, Jersey City, NJ.
OTA Int. 2024 Feb 29;7(1):e322. doi: 10.1097/OI9.0000000000000322. eCollection 2024 Mar.
To compare mortality rates between patients treated surgically for periprosthetic fractures (PPF) after total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), peri-implant (PI), and interprosthetic (IP) fractures while identifying risk factors associated with mortality following PPF.
Retrospective.
Single, Level II Trauma Center.
PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective review was conducted of 129 consecutive patients treated surgically for fractures around a pre-existing prosthesis or implant from 2013 to 2020. Patients were separated into 4 comparison groups: THA, TKA, PI, and IP fractures.
Revision implant or arthroplasty, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), intramedullary nailing (IMN), percutaneous screws, or a combination of techniques.
Primary outcome measures include mortality rates of different types of PPF, PI, and IP fractures at 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year postoperative. We analyzed risk factors associated with mortality aimed to determine whether treatment type affects mortality.
One hundred twenty-nine patients were included for final analysis. Average follow-up was similar between all groups. The overall 1-year mortality rate was 1 month (5%), 3 months (12%), 6 months (13%), 1 year (15%), and 2 years (22%). There were no differences in mortality rates between each group at 30 days, 90 days, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years (-value = 0.86). A Kaplan-Meier survival curve demonstrated no difference in survivorship up to 2 years. Older than 65 years, history of hypothyroidism and dementia, and discharge to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) led to increased mortality. There was no survival benefit in treating patients with PPFs with either revision, ORIF, IMN, or a combination of techniques.
The overall mortality rates observed were 1 month (5%), 3 months (12%), 6 months (13%), 1 year (15%), and 2 years (22%), and no differences were found between each group at all follow-up time points. Patients aged 65 and older with a history of hypothyroidism and/or dementia discharged to an SNF are at increased risk for mortality. From a mortality perspective, surgeons should not hesitate to choose the surgical treatment they feel most comfortable performing.
Level III.
比较全髋关节置换术(THA)、全膝关节置换术(TKA)、假体周围(PI)和假体间(IP)骨折后接受手术治疗的假体周围骨折(PPF)患者的死亡率,同时确定与PPF后死亡相关的危险因素。
回顾性研究。
单一的二级创伤中心。
患者/参与者:对2013年至2020年期间129例因既有假体或植入物周围骨折接受手术治疗的连续患者进行回顾性研究。患者被分为4个比较组:THA、TKA、PI和IP骨折。
翻修植入物或关节成形术、切开复位内固定(ORIF)、髓内钉固定(IMN)、经皮螺钉固定或多种技术联合使用。
主要观察指标包括不同类型PPF、PI和IP骨折术后1个月、3个月、6个月、1年和2年的死亡率。我们分析了与死亡相关的危险因素,旨在确定治疗类型是否影响死亡率。
129例患者纳入最终分析。所有组的平均随访时间相似。总体1年死亡率为1个月(5%)、3个月(12%)、6个月(13%)、1年(15%)和2年(22%)。各治疗组在30天、90天、6个月、1年和2年时的死亡率无差异(P值 = 0.86)。Kaplan-Meier生存曲线显示2年内生存率无差异。年龄大于65岁、甲状腺功能减退和痴呆病史以及出院后入住专业护理机构(SNF)会导致死亡率增加。采用翻修、ORIF、IMN或联合技术治疗PPF患者并无生存获益。
观察到的总体死亡率为1个月(5%)、3个月(12%)、6个月(13%)、1年(15%)和2年(22%),在所有随访时间点各治疗组之间均未发现差异。年龄65岁及以上、有甲状腺功能减退和/或痴呆病史且出院后入住SNF的患者死亡风险增加。从死亡率角度来看,外科医生应毫不犹豫地选择他们最擅长的手术治疗方式。
三级。