Periprosthetic Distal Femoral Fractures Around a Total Knee Arthroplasty: a Meta-analysis Comparing Locking compression Plating and Retrograde Intramedullary Nailing.

PURPOSE

The number of total knee replacements (TKRs) performed per year has been increasing annually and it is estimated that by 2030 demand would reach 3.48 million procedures per year in the United States Of America. The prevalence of periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) around TKRs has followed this trend with incidences ranging from 0.3% to 3.5%. Distal femoral PPFs are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. When there is sufficient bone stock in the distal femur and a fracture pattern conducive to fixation, locking compression plating (LCP) and retrograde intramedullary nailing (RIMN) are commonly used fixation strategies. Conversely, in situations with loosening and deficient bone stock, a salvage procedure such as a distal femoral replacement is recognized as an alternative. This meta-analysis investigates the rates of non-union, re-operation, infection, and mortality for LCPs and RIMNs when performed for distal femoral PPFs fractures around TKRs.

METHOD

A search was conducted to identify articles relevant to the management of distal femoral PPFs around TKRs in adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Articles meeting the inclusion criteria were then assessed for methodological quality using the methodological items for non-randomised studies (MINORS) criteria. Articles were reviewed, and data were compiled into tables for analysis.

RESULTS

10 articles met the inclusion criteria, reporting on 528 PPFs. The overall incidence of complications was: non-union 9.4%, re-operation 12.9%, infection 2.4%, and mortality 5.5%. This meta-analysis found no significant differences between RIMN and LCP in rates of non-union (9.2% vs 9.6%) re-operation (15.1% vs 11.3%), infection (2.1% vs 2.6%), and mortality (6.0% vs 5.2%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference in rates of non-union, re-operation, infection, and mortality between RIMN and LCP and both remain valid surgical treatment options.