Cullen Mark M, Cochrane Niall H, Wu Christine J, Wellman Samuel S, Bolognesi Michael P, Seyler Thorsten M, Ryan Sean P
Duke University Hospital, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Durham, North Carolina.
J Arthroplasty. 2025 Aug;40(8S1):S266-S272. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2025.01.046. Epub 2025 Feb 1.
Periprosthetic fracture often requires revision hip arthroplasty. This study evaluated factors contributing to subsequent revisions and reoperations in patients who underwent revision hip arthroplasty for periprosthetic femur fracture. The authors hypothesized that surgeons who had higher revision volume would have decreased subsequent complications.
A retrospective review of 84 revision hip arthroplasties for Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femur fractures performed at a single academic institution was conducted. Surgeons were categorized based on their reoperation volume: experienced (≥ 12 complicated hip reoperations annually) and less experienced (< 12 complicated hip reoperations annually). Univariable and multivariable analyses evaluated risk factors for all-cause revision. Survival analyses were performed using Cox proportional hazard modeling.
Of the 84 patients, there were eight (10%) revisions and 15 (18%) reoperations. Survivorship free of all-cause revision was greater for high-volume surgeons [hazard ratio [HR] 0.03 (0.00 to 0.43); P = 0.01]. Subanalysis demonstrated that experienced surgeons had increased 5-year survivorship free of septic revisions [HR 0.03 (0.00 to 0.54); P = 0.02]. The multivariable analysis also demonstrated that extended oral antimicrobial prophylaxis was associated with 5-year septic reoperation-free survival [HR 0.03 (0 to 0.45); P = 0.01]; this only trended toward significance in 5-year septic revision-free survival [HR 0.04 (0.00 to 1.97); P = 0.11]. There was no association between aseptic revision and surgeon experience in univariable or multivariable analysis.
Experienced arthroplasty surgeons, as well as extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis, may improve patient outcomes when treating patients who have periprosthetic fractures requiring revision arthroplasty. Consideration should be given to call schedules and management of this vulnerable population.
假体周围骨折通常需要进行髋关节翻修置换术。本研究评估了因假体周围股骨骨折接受髋关节翻修置换术的患者后续翻修和再次手术的相关因素。作者推测,翻修手术量较高的外科医生后续并发症会减少。
对在一家学术机构进行的84例温哥华B2型假体周围股骨骨折髋关节翻修置换术进行回顾性研究。根据外科医生的再次手术量进行分类:经验丰富的(每年≥12例复杂髋关节再次手术)和经验较少的(每年<12例复杂髋关节再次手术)。单变量和多变量分析评估全因翻修的危险因素。使用Cox比例风险模型进行生存分析。
84例患者中,有8例(10%)进行了翻修,15例(18%)进行了再次手术。高手术量外科医生无全因翻修的生存率更高[风险比[HR]0.03(0.00至0.43);P = 0.01]。亚组分析表明,经验丰富的外科医生无感染性翻修的5年生存率有所提高[HR 0.03(0.00至0.54);P = 0.02]。多变量分析还表明,延长口服抗菌药物预防与5年无感染性再次手术生存相关[HR 0.03(0至0.45);P = 0.01];这在5年无感染性翻修生存中仅呈趋势性显著[HR 0.04(0.00至1.97);P = 0.11]。在单变量或多变量分析中,无菌性翻修与外科医生经验之间无关联。
经验丰富的关节置换外科医生以及延长口服抗生素预防措施,在治疗需要翻修置换术的假体周围骨折患者时,可能会改善患者预后。应考虑为这一脆弱人群安排值班表和管理措施。