Frequency and associated factor of atypical periprosthetic femoral fracture after hip arthroplasty

Update on Atypical Femoral Fractures

➤ Atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) are stress fractures between the lesser trochanter and the metaphyseal flare that are most commonly related to prolonged (3 to 5 years) antiresorptive medication use.➤ An important finding is a visible transverse line in the lateral cortex, known as the "dreaded black line." Complete fractures are transverse and have minimal comminution.➤ Prodromal symptoms including hip, groin, thigh, and knee pain are present in more than one-half of cases and are usually misdiagnosed.➤ Nonoperative treatment for all patients with AFF includes withdrawal of bisphosphonates, assessment for secondary causes of osteoporosis, and optimization of vitamin D and calcium.➤ Incomplete fractures without a visible line can initially be treated nonoperatively with protected weight-bearing.➤ Intramedullary nailing is indicated for complete fractures and incomplete fractures with a visible fracture line. Delayed healing after fixation should be anticipated.➤ Treatment with parathyroid hormone (PTH) analogs (teriparatide and abaloparatide) after AFF prevents other fractures in high-risk patients, but the effect on healing of the fracture is unclear.

Atypical Periprosthetic Femoral Fracture Might be Considered a Distinct Subtype of Atypical Femoral Fracture: A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

The exact relationship among atypical periprosthetic femoral fractures (APFFs), typical periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs), and atypical femur fractures (AFFs) remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of APFFs among PFFs and to identify the clinical characteristics, management, and prognosis that distinguish APFFs from typical PFFs and AFFs to further determine the relationship among these three fracture types.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we reviewed the clinical data of 117 consecutive patients who had PFFs after hip arthroplasty between January 2012 and December 2022 and further classified them into an APFF group and a typical PFF group according to the revised ASBMR diagnostic criteria for AFF. Moreover, patients who had subtrochanteric or femoral shaft fractures in the same period and met the diagnostic criteria for AFF were recruited and classified into the AFF group. Demographic information, minor features of AFF, comorbidities, history of medication usage, management, and complications were collected and compared among patients with typical PFFs, APFFs, and AFFs.

RESULTS

Eleven PFFs were identified as APFFs, and the prevalence of APFFs among PFFs was 9.4%. Significant differences were found in generalized increase in cortical thickness (p = 0.019), prodromal symptoms (p < 0.001), and the incidence of bilateral fractures (p = 0.010) among the groups, where the incidences of these minor features in the APFF group and the AFF group were higher than those in the typical PFF group. Of note, the duration of fracture healing of APFFs was significantly longer than that of typical PFFs and AFFs (p < 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively). In addition, the APFF group and the AFF group had higher proportions of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (p = 0.004 and p = 0.027, respectively), bisphosphonate (BP) usage (p = 0.026 and p < 0.001, respectively), and longer duration of BP usage (p = 0.003 and p = 0.007, respectively) than the typical PFF group. Furthermore, significant differences were found in management (p < 0.001) and complication rate (p = 0.020) among the groups, and the rate of complications in the APFF group and the AFF group was higher than that in the typical PFF group.

CONCLUSIONS

APFFs not only fulfilled the mandatory and major diagnostic criteria for AFF but also had many clinical characteristics, management and prognosis distinguishing them from typical PFFs but resembling AFFs; hence, the diagnostic criteria for AFF might be revised to incorporate APFF as a distinct subtype of the condition.

Periprosthetic fractures are osteoporotic fractures: missed opportunities for osteoporosis diagnosis

Joint replacement surgery is common in older adults, leading to increasing periprosthetic fracture (PPFx) occurrence. We reviewed all PPFx seen over a 4-year period at an academic hospital. Clinical osteoporosis could be diagnosed based on existing data in 104 (67%) at the time of PPFx. Periprosthetic fractures are generally osteoporosis-related.

PURPOSE

Periprosthetic fractures (PPFx) cause morbidity, mortality, and cost. This study's purpose was to describe osteoporosis-related data available at the time of PPFx.

METHODS

The electronic medical record (EMR) of PPFx patients seen over 4 years in a university orthopedic practice were reviewed. Demographic data and osteoporosis relevant parameters were collected. Prior DXA studies were reviewed, and L1 Hounsfield unit (HU) measurements were performed on CT scans obtained within 2 years before PPFx. Clinical osteoporosis was defined as prior diagnosis, prescribed osteoporosis treatment, T-score ≤  - 2.5, HU ≤ 100, or prior fracture.

RESULTS

Records of 156 PPFx patients (115 F/41 M), mean (SD) age 75.4 (11.9), were reviewed. Almost all 153/156 (98%) of these fractures were femoral. Falls caused 139 (89%); 12 (8%) were spontaneous. Mean time post-arthroplasty was 7.9 (6.3) years. Prior fragility fracture(s) occurred in 72 (46%); 14 were PPFx. Osteoporosis was previously diagnosed in 45 (29%) and medications prescribed in 41 (26%). Prior to PPFx, DXA data were available in 62, mean (SD) lowest T-score was - 1.9 (0.9) and was ≤  - 2.5 in 19. CT data were available in 46; mean (SD) L1 HU was 79.0 (29.4) and was ≤ 100 in 35. Based on existing data, clinical osteoporosis could have been diagnosed in 104 (67%) at the time of PPFx.

CONCLUSION

Periprosthetic fractures are osteoporosis-related. They occur in older adults, often female, and result from falls; BMD, when assessed, is low. Data available at the time of PPFx often allows osteoporosis diagnosis; this should prompt evaluation and pharmacologic treatment consideration.

Frequency and pathogenesis of periprosthetic atypical femoral fractures associated with total knee arthroplasty: A multicenter prospective study with complementary histopathological and biomechanical analysis

INTRODUCTION

Although the diagnostic criteria for atypical femoral fracture (AFF) exclude periprosthetic fractures, reports of periprosthetic femoral fractures with characteristics of AFF are rapidly increasing. In this study, we investigated the frequency and pathogenesis of periprosthetic AFF associated with total knee arthroplasty (TKA) based on a theory of AFF subtypes that divides AFFs into two main types: fragility stress fractures of the bowed femoral shaft in the mid-shaft and "typical" subtrochanteric AFFs due to suppression of bone turnover (e.g., by bisphosphonates).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This multicenter prospective study of AFFs was conducted from 2015 through 2022. Clinical, pathological, and morphological characteristics were investigated in patients with periprosthetic AFFs associated only with non-stem TKA. Then, biomechanical investigation of the periprosthetic AFF was performed by computer tomography-based finite element analysis (CT/FEA) using two models with different load axes to examine how the correction of lower limb alignment by TKA influences the tensile stress distribution of the femur and the location of the AFF.

RESULTS

Four of 61 AFFs (6.6%) were identified to be periprosthetic AFF (1 mid-shaft; 3 subtrochanteric). Periprosthetic AFFs had characteristics including mechanical stress due to bowing deformity and potentially suppressed bone turnover due to long-term exposure to specific drugs (e.g., bisphosphonates and glucocorticoids). Although 2 periprosthetic AFFs appeared to involve a bowed femur, one with both of the aforementioned characteristics occurred in the subtrochanteric region, which would be an unusual site for a bowed AFF, and it was demonstrated histologically to have biological activity at the fracture site, suggesting a stress fracture. Furthermore, CT/FEA revealed that tensile stress distribution changed proximally as load axis was shifted laterally according to correction of lower limb alignment by TKA.

CONCLUSION

Orthopedic surgeons should recognize the presence of TKA-associated periprosthetic AFF caused by various factors including specific drugs, bowing deformity, and lower limb alignment. X-rays of the full-length femurs should be checked regularly after TKA, especially in patients with bowed femurs or long-term exposure to specific drugs.

Is bisphosphonate use a risk factor for atypical periprosthetic/peri-implant fractures? - A metanalysis of retrospective cohort studies and systematic review of the current evidence

INTRODUCTION

Atypical periprosthetic/peri-implant fractures are not recognised in any widely used classification and therefore little focus is given to them. Multiple case reports and case series demonstrate these fractures exist and are related to bisphosphonate (BP) use.

HYPOTHESIS

Are patients taking long-term BPs at an increased risk of developing an atypical periprosthetic/peri-implant fracture? Is a particular BP drug causing an increased risk of fracture? Is there a correlation between the time of BP use and the incidence of fractures? Do vitamin D analogues or parathyroid hormones reduce the time to union?

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Systematic review of all available evidence on the existence of periprosthetic/peri-implant atypical fractures in patients taking long-term BPs and metanalysis of available retrospective cohort studies. Selected 1 systematic review, 7 retrospective cohort studies (5 used for metanalysis) and 32 case reports.

RESULTS

Metanalysis reported a risk ratio of 14.1, p=0.25, suggesting bisphosphonates are a risk factor in the development of periprosthetic/peri-implant atypical fractures. The secondary outcomes couldn't be reliably identified due to the small size of available studies and risk of significant bias.

DISCUSSION

Atypical periprosthetic/peri-implant fractures are an entity and seem to be associated with the use of bisphosphonates. The benefits of bisphosphonates use outweigh the risks, but clinicians should be aware of atypical fractures and actively search for them when patients on long-term bisphosphonates attend with non-specific pain close to the implant/prosthesis or reduced mobility.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II, Systematic review and metanalysis.

Bilateral Atypical Femoral Fractures after Bisphosphonate Treatment for Osteoporosis: A Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

This literature review aimed to investigate the incidence, anatomical concerns, etiology, symptoms, diagnostic tools, management, and prognosis of bisphosphonate (BP)-associated bilateral atypical femoral fractures (AFFs).

METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Sciences, and CINAHL databases were searched up to 20 March 2022. All cases of bilateral AFFs were included, excluding those without any bisphosphonate treatment information and those in which the femoral fracture did not precisely fit into the diagnostic criteria for AFF.

RESULTS

We identified 43 patients with bilateral AFFs associated with BP use and conducted a comprehensive analysis. Among 43 patients, 29 (67%) had prodromal symptoms. Regarding the simultaneity of fracture, 21 cases (49%) occurred simultaneously, and 22 cases (51%) occurred sequentially. Alendronate was the most commonly used BP treatment (59%). Regardless of the medication type, BP intake duration was more than 5 years in 77%. The initial diagnosis was performed using X-rays in all cases. A total of 53% of patients had complete fractures, and all patients underwent surgical treatment. Among the remaining patients with incomplete fractures, 18% and 29% received surgical and medical treatments, respectively. After BP discontinuation, teriparatide was most commonly used (63%).

CONCLUSIONS

The careful evaluation of relevant imaging findings in patients with thigh/groin pain allows the identification of early incomplete fractures and timely management. Since the rate of contralateral side fractures is also high, imaging studies should be performed on the asymptomatic contralateral side.

Preoperative Malnutrition and Metabolic Markers May Predict Periprosthetic Fractures in Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background

Periprosthetic fractures are a devastating complication of total hip arthroplasty (THA) and are associated with significantly higher mortality rates in the postoperative period. Given the strain that periprosthetic fractures place on the patient as well as the healthcare system, identifying and optimizing medical comorbidities is essential in reducing complications and improving outcomes.

Methods

All THA with primary indications of osteoarthritis from 2007 to 2020 were queried from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Demographic data, preoperative laboratory values, medical comorbidities, hospital course, and acute complications were collected and compared between patients with and without readmission for a periprosthetic fracture. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine associated independent risk factors for periprosthetic fractures after index THA.

Results

The analysis included 275,107 patients, of which 2539 patients were readmitted for periprosthetic fractures. Patients with postoperative fractures were more likely to be older (>65 years), females, BMI >40, and increased medical comorbidities. Preoperative hypoalbuminemia, hyponatremia, and abnormal estimated glomerular filtration rates were independent risk factors for sustaining a periprosthetic fracture and readmission within 30 days. Modifiable patient-related factors of concurrent smoking and chronic steroid use at the time of index THA were also independent risk factors for periprosthetic fractures. Inpatient metrics of longer length of stay, operative time, and discharge to rehab predicted postarthroplasty fracture risk. Readmitted fracture patients subsequently had increased risks of developing a surgical site infection, urinary tract infection, and requiring blood transfusions.

Conclusions

Patients with hypoalbuminemia, hyponatremia, and abnormal estimated glomerular filtration rate are at increased risk for sustaining periprosthetic fractures after THA. Preoperative optimization with close monitoring of metabolic markers and modifiable risk factors may help not only prevent acute periprosthetic fractures but also associated infection and bleeding risk with fracture readmission.

The use of bone-modifying agents in multiple myeloma

Multiple myeloma is a hematological neoplasm characterized by abnormal proliferation of plasma cells in the bone marrow and is usually associated with increased bone pain and skeletal-related events such as pathological fracture and/or spinal cord compression. Myeloma bone disease results in changes in the bone-marrow microenvironment evidenced by increased osteoclastic activity and/or decreased osteoblastic activity, which negatively affect quality of life. Treatment of myeloma bone disease includes bisphosphonates or denosumab (bone-modifying agents). These agents do not induce the formation of new bone or repair existing bone damage, but they can decrease bone pain and the risk of pathological fracture. While these agents improve quality of life, it is not known whether they improve overall survival. This review focuses on different classes of bone-modifying agents, their mechanisms of action, time of initiation, duration of therapy, and potential survival benefits.

Peri-implant atypical femoral fracture after nail or plate osteosynthesis

BACKGROUND

A lack of scientific information regarding the risk factors and diagnosis of peri-implant atypical femoral fracture (PI-AFF) exists. We report a case series of developed PI-AFF with a nail or plate construct wherein prior femoral fractures were already healed after osteosynthesis. This study aimed to identify the cause and risk factors of PI-AFF and to devise a preventive method based on this.

METHODS

We identified 11 PI-AFFs displaying features of AFFs. All patients were ambulant females (mean age, 74.9 years). The mean T-score of the femur measured by DEXA (Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry) scan was 3.5. Osteosynthesis was performed with a plate and an intramedullary nail in six and five patients, respectively. Possible risk factors were investigated, including the used implant, the medication of bisphosphonate, the characteristics of previous fracture (AFF or non-AFF), and the co-existence of AFF on the contralateral side.

RESULTS

The PI-AFFs developed at an average of 6.6 years from the time of prior fracture. All fractures were located at the screw through the plate or nail. Regarding anatomic locations, seven and four fractures were at the subtrochanteric area and diaphysis, respectively. Diaphyseal PI-AFFs occurred in plating cases, all of which were associated with excessive femoral bowing. Subtrochanteric PI-AFFs included all five patients with nail fixation, which occurred near a proximal interlocking screw. Six of the 11 patients were on bisphosphonate treatment before or at the time of fracture. The duration of bisphosphonate treatment was 6 years on average. Concerning the previous femoral fractures, seven and four patients were AFF and non-AFF, respectively. Considering the pathology on the contralateral leg, eight had suffered diaphyseal AFF. Four patients were treated nonoperatively. Seven patients needed an operation; 6 of them healed after reconstruction nailing, and one needed hip arthroplasty because of the associated displaced femoral neck fracture.

CONCLUSIONS

PI-AFFs may develop through the screw hole at the subtrochanteric or diaphyseal area due to femoral fragility and stress riser effect of the implant. An improved osteosynthesis strategy may be necessary to avoid PI-AFFs when fixing osteoporotic femoral fractures.

Surgical and Pharmacological Management of Periprosthetic Atypical Femoral Fractures: A Narrative Literature Review

Introduction

An increasing number of patients is annually undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA), and a significant proportion of these patients are elderly and consequently at a higher risk of complications because of age, osteoporosis, and medical comorbidities. Periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) are one of the worst complications of THA associated with high rates of unfavorable prognosis. Besides, in the last decade, a new independent disease entity called “atypical femoral fracture” (AFF) has been identified and defined by the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) task force. Some PFFs present clinical history and radiographic aspect consistent with an AFF, meeting the ASBMR criteria for the diagnosis of AFF except that PFFs by themselves are an exclusion criterion for AFF. However, there is an increasing number of published studies suggesting that periprosthetic atypical femoral fractures (PAFFs) exist and should not be excluded by definition.

Significance

Nowadays, although there is an increasing interest in PAFFs, there are still very few studies published on the topic and a lack of consensus regarding their treatment. This narrative literature review aims to introduce this new emerging topic to a wider readership describing the characteristics of PAFFs and the state-of-the-art in their management.

Conclusions

Many authors agree that PAFFs should be considered as a subgroup of PFFs that have atypical characteristics; they also show a significant correlation with prolonged bisphosphonate use. A correct diagnosis is paramount for proper treatment of the disease that requires both surgical and medical actions to be taken.

Fracture Risk Following an Atypical Femoral Fracture

Atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) occurring during the course of osteoporosis treatment usually lead to discontinuation of anti-resorptive (AR) drugs. However, the risk of fracture after an AFF is unknown. We conducted a follow-up study of patients with AFF matched 1:3 for age and gender with patients with a peripheral major osteoporotic fracture (pMOF), in the setting of a fracture liaison service, to investigate the incidence of subsequent low-trauma fractures. Fifty-five patients with AFF (95% women, age [mean ± standard deviation] 75 ± 10 years, 89% exposed to AR drugs), followed for 6.2 ± 3.7 years, were compared to 165 matched controls with a pMOF (hip 85%) followed for 4.3 ± 2.6 years. During the follow-up, 38% of patients in the AFF group and 16% in the pMOF group received AR therapies. Continuation of AR drugs after an AFF was associated with contralateral AFF in 27% of subjects. The risks of new low-trauma, major osteoporotic and imminent (within 2 years) fractures, were similar between the two groups: incidence rate ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) of subsequent fracture following AFF relative to pMOF, 1.30 (95% CI, 0.82-2.04), 1.28 (95% CI, 0.74-2.15), and 1.11 (95% CI, 0.54-2.15), respectively. Moreover, the risk of sustaining multiple fractures per participant was significantly increased among patients with AFF compared to pMOF (hazard ratio 1.48 [95% CI, 1.00-2.19]; p = 0.049). When taking mortality into account, the risk of subsequent fractures tended to be higher in the AFF group (sub-hazard ratio 1.42 [95% CI, 0.95-2.12]). In conclusion, patients who sustained an AFF are at high risk of subsequent fragility fractures, at least equal or even greater to the risk observed after a pMOF. However, continuation of AR drugs increases the risk of contralateral AFF. Therefore, optimal modalities for secondary fracture prevention after AFF require further evaluation. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Atypical periprosthetic femoral fractures of the hip: A PRISMA compliant systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Long-term use of bisphosphonates (BPs) is associated with Atypical Femoral Fracture (AFF). Theoretically, periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFF) should be excluded from the diagnosis of AFF. However, recently several studies reported the occurrence of PPFs around a hip arthroplasty presenting features of an AFF. The present study describes the characteristics of Atypical Periprosthetic Femoral Fracture (APFF) and evaluates the effectiveness of their management through a PRISMA compliant systematic review of the published case reports and series.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was performed using "periprosthetic fracture" and "atypical femoral fracture" as keywords. Patients demographics, drug use, clinical and imaging characteristics, stem fixation and classification, management strategies for APFF and patients' outcomes, were also collected.

RESULTS

The present review included and analysed 17 patients from 12 studies. All APFFs occurred in females with a mean age of 75.9 years of age (range 43-87). In 11 patients, APFFs occurred around an uncemented stem, and in 6 around a cemented stem. Ten fractures were incomplete, and 7 complete. Conservative management was effective in 4 of 10 patients with incomplete fracture, while all patients with complete fractures underwent open reduction and internal fixation. A fracture non-union was observed in 5 patients and further surgery was required.

DISCUSSIONS

APFFs share several clinical and imaging characteristics with AFF. An appropriate and early diagnosis may allow to improve the outcome of these fractures, the management of which should be based on the same principles of that of AFFs.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the low quality of published articles and the heterogeneity of the treatment used, a clear recommendation of the most appropriate treatment cannot be formulated.

Atypical periprosthetic femoral fractures after arthroplasty for fracture are at high risk of complications

It is difficult to investigate clinical features in a single-center study because atypical periprosthetic femoral fracture (APFF) is rare. This study aims to perform a nationwide survey of APFF to investigate the characteristics of this fracture and compare the clinical outcome with that of typical periprosthetic femoral fracture (typical PFF). A nationwide survey was performed asking for cooperation from 183 councilors of the Japanese Society for Fracture Repair. The subjects were patients with APFF injured between 2008 and 2017. The control group was comprised of patients with typical PFF of our facility injured in the same period. A total of 43 patients met the APFF definition. The control group was comprised of 75 patients with typical PFF. The rate of bisphosphonate use was significantly higher in the APFFs group than in the typical PFF group (62.8% and 32%, p < 0.02). The rate of cemented stem was significantly higher in the APFFs group than in the typical PFF group (30.2% and 6.7%, p < 0.001). In the patients with arthroplasty for hip fracture, multivariable logistic regression analyses showed that APFF was an independent risk factor of complications following the initial management (Odds ratio 11.1, 95% confidence interval 1.05–117.2, p = 0.045). However, no significant association between PFF and APFF was observed in the patients with arthroplasty for other hip diseases. The risk of complications was higher in the APFF group than in the typical PFF group in the patients with arthroplasty for fracture. When AFPP after arthroplasty for the fracture is suspected, it may be necessary to add not only internal fixation with a normal plate but also some additional treatment.

Periprosthetic Atypical Femoral Fractures Exist: A Retrospective Study at a Single Institution. Prevalence on 115 Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Around a Primary Hip Stem

BACKGROUND

Some periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) present history and radiographic aspect consistent with an atypical femoral fracture (AFF), fulfilling the criteria for AFF except that PFFs by themselves are excluded from the diagnosis of AFFs. The aim of this study is to evaluate in a single institution series of PFFs if any of them could be considered a periprosthetic atypical femoral fracture (PAFF), and their prevalence.

METHODS

Surgical records were searched for PFFs around a primary hip stem from January 2013 to December 2019. Cases were classified according to Vancouver classification. Demographic and medical history was extracted. Fisher's exact test was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred fifteen PFFs were identified, 59 of them were type B1 and 16 were type C. Radiographs and medical records were available for all patients. Twenty-four patients (32%) have been treated with bisphosphonates (BPs) for longer than 4 years. Four patients presented a fracture with characteristics of PAFF. When enlarged to all PFFs of the series, no other PAFF was found: prevalence of PAFFs was 5.3% for type B1 and C cases and 3.5% for all surgically treated PFFs. Statistical significative difference between PAFFs and PFFs was found for prolonged BP assumption and for the level of fracture clear of the stem.

CONCLUSION

Fracture with characteristics of AFFs can also happen over a prosthetic stem, configuring themselves as PAFFs, and they are related to prolonged BP use. As a correct diagnosis is mandatory for proper treatment, a revision of criteria for AFFs should be considered, accepting that PAFFs exist.

Evaluation and management of atypical femoral fractures: an update of current knowledge

Atypical femoral fractures are often attributed to the use of anti-resorptive medications such as bisphosphonates (BP). Whilst they have proven effects on fragility fracture prevention, clinical and laboratory evidence is evolving linking BP-related suppression of bone remodelling to the development of atypical stress-related sub-trochanteric fractures (Shane et al. in JBMR 29:1-23, 2014; Odvina et al. in JCEM 90:1294-301, 2005; Durchschlag et al. in JBMR 21(10):1581-1590, 2006; Donnelly et al. in JBMR 27:672-678, 2012; Mashiba et al. in Bone 28(5):524-531, 2001; Dell et al. in JBMR 27(12):2544-2550, 2012; Black et al. in Lancet 348:1535-1541, 1996; Black et al. in NEJM 356:1809-1822, 2007; Black et al. in JAMA 296:2927-2938, 2006; Schwartz et al. in JBMR 25:976-82, 2010). Injuries may present asymptomatically or with prodromal thigh pain and most can be successfully managed with cephalomedullary nailing and discontinuation of BP therapy. Such injuries exhibit a prolonged time to fracture union with high rates of non-union and metal-work failure when compared to typical subtrochanteric osteoporotic femoral fractures. Despite emerging literature on AFFs, their management continues to pose a challenge to the orthopaedic and extended multi-disciplinary team. The purpose of this review includes evaluation of the current evidence supporting the management of AFFs, clinical and radiological features associated with their presentation and a review of reported surgical strategies to treat and prevent these devastating injures.

Atypical periprosthetic femoral fractures of the hip: characterisation of three cases

INTRODUCTION

Long-term use of bisphosphonates (BPs) has been associated with a specific type of tensile side femoral stress fracture known as Atypical Femoral Fracture (AFF). Theoretically periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFF) should be excluded from the diagnosis of AFF. However, emerging evidence correlates prolonged BPs use with the occurrence of a type of PFF with an atypical pattern (atypical PFF, APFF). The aim of the present study is to report 3 cases of APFF treated at a single centre.

METHODS

Clinical and radiographic records of PFF that occurred between January 2016 and August 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients meeting the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) criteria for definition of PFF were included. Management strategies for APFF and patient outcomes, including fracture healing and hip function (assessed by the Oxford Hip Score [OHS]) were collected.

RESULTS

3 patients in the study period were identified as APFF (1 incomplete, 2 complete). All patients were females with a mean age of 83.3 years. All patients were treated with lateral plating. The application of a contralateral strut allograft resulted in fracture healing in cases of complete fractures. Mean OHS at final follow-up was 34.3.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite occurring around a hip stem like PFF, APFF had peculiar clinical and radiographic features, making them more similar to AFF. Therefore, the orthopaedic surgeon should also consider the natural history and healing problems associated with AFF prior in order to choose the most appropriate management for APFF.

Atypical periprosthetic femoral fracture associated with long-term bisphosphonate therapy

Background

Atypical femoral fracture is one of the many complications after the long-term use of bisphosphonates. The American Society for Bone and Mineral Research has officially excluded periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) from the definition of atypical femoral fractures (AFFs). Several case reports found that PFFs can occur with characteristics similar to those of AFFs. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the proportion of atypical fractures among Vancouver type B1 fractures, and to determine the association between the long-term use of bisphosphonates and the occurrence of atypical periprosthetic femoral fractures (APFFs).

Methods

In this retrospective study, we reviewed 41 patients with Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic fractures between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2018. We classified them into two groups, namely atypical and typical PFFs, based on the fracture morphology. We noted the proportion of atypical periprosthetic fractures among B1 fractures and identified risk factors.

Results

Among the 41 PFFs, 5 (13%) fractures were classified as atypical PFF based on the radiological characteristics. The longer duration of bisphosphonate use was probably the only independent risk factor that significantly increases the occurrence of APFF (p = 0.03, 0.08 (CI 0.008 – 0.16)). There were no significant differences in age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, corticosteroid use, positioning of the femoral stem, the method of fixation (cemented or cementless) and time lapse from before the primary prosthesis implantation to the PFF in the development of atypical fracture type.

Conclusions

There seems to be a correlation between the long-term intake of bisphosphonates and the atypical periprosthetic fracture. Atypical femoral fracture can also occur in the periprosthetic form.

Trial registration

Study number: 22/2019-SZTE, http://www.klinikaikutatas.hu/hu/kutatasetika/jovahagyott-vizsgalatok-koezerdeku-adatai/category/25-jovahagyott-vizsgalatok-kozerdeku-adatai-rkeb-2019.html?download=985:22-2019.

Periprosthetic atypical femoral fractures exist and are associated with duration of bisphosphonate therapy

Aims

Currently, periprosthetic fractures are excluded from the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) definition of atypical femoral fracture (AFFs). This study aims to report on a series of periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) that otherwise meet the criteria for AFFs. Secondary aims were to identify predictors of periprosthetic atypical femoral fractures (PAFFs) and quantify the complications of treatment.

Patients and Methods

This was a retrospective case control study of consecutive patients with periprosthetic femoral fractures between 2007 and 2017. Two observers identified 16 PAFF cases (mean age 73.9 years (44 to 88), 14 female patients) and 17 typical periprosthetic fractures in patients on bisphosphonate therapy as controls (mean age 80.7 years (60 to 86, 13 female patients). Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of PAFF. Management and complications were recorded.

Results

Interobserver agreement for the PAFF classification was excellent (kappa = 0.944; p < 0.001). On univariate analysis compared with controls, patients with PAFFs had higher mean body mass indices (28.6 kg/m2 (sd 8.9) vs 21.5 kg/m2 (sd 3.3); p = 0.009), longer durations of bisphosphonate therapy (median 5.5 years (IQR 3.2 to 10.6) vs 2.4 years (IQR 1.0 to 6.4); p = 0.04), and were less likely to be on alendronate (50% vs 94%; p = 0.02) with an indication of secondary osteoporosis (19% vs 0%; p = 0.049). Duration of bisphosphonate therapy was an independent predictor of PAFF on multivariate analysis (R2 = 0.733; p = 0.05). Following primary fracture management, complication rates were higher in PAFFs (9/16, 56%) than controls (5/17, 29%; p = 0.178) with a relative risk of any complication following PAFF of 1.71 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 3.8) and of reoperation 2.56 (95% CI 1.3 to 5.2).

Conclusion

AFFs do occur in association with prostheses. Longer duration of bisphosphonate therapy is an independent predictor of PAFF. Complication rates are higher following PAFFs compared with typical PFFs, particularly of reoperation and infection. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1285–1291

[Mid- and long-term effectiveness of total hip arthroplasty with Ribbed femoral stem prosthesis in 354 cases]

Objective

To evaluate the mid- and long-term effectiveness of total hip arthroplasty (THA) with Ribbed femoral stem prosthesis.

Methods

A clinical data of 354 patients (384 hips) with hip disease who underwent THA with Ribbed femoral stem prostheses between October 2006 and May 2016 was retrospectively analyzed. There were 171 males and 183 females, with an average age of 53.4 years (range, 20-82 years). There were 324 cases of single hip and 30 cases of bilateral hips. The cause of THA included the avascular necrosis of the femoral head in 151 cases (159 hips), hip osteoarthritis in 134 cases (136 hips), rheumatoid arthritis in 43 cases (43 hips), ankylosing spondylitis in 20 cases (40 hips), and trauma in 6 cases (6 hips). The Harris score of total 354 patients before operation was 42.34±8.89. Harris scores were used to evaluate hip function after operation. X-ray films were used to determine the length of the lower limb, the radiolucent line on the femur side, the stability of the prosthesis, and the occurrence of stress shielding.

Results

The incisions healed by first intention. All patients were followed up 2-11 years with an average of 7.4 years. The Harris score at last follow-up was 80.52±7.61, which significantly increased when compared with preoperative score ( t=134.804, P=0.000). Two cases (2 hips) of prosthetic infections, 3 cases (3 hips) of prothesis loosening, and 4 cases (4 hips) of periprosthetic fractures, and 48 cases (48 hips) of mild to moderate thigh pain occurred after operation. X-ray films showed 76 cases (78 hips) with radiolucent lines on the femur side and stress shielding. According to the Engh's method, there were 364 hips of bone ingrowth, 15 hips of fibrosis ingrowth, and 5 hips of prosthesis instability. The femoral stem subsidence occurred in 25 cases (25 hips), and the difference in leg length discrepancy was more than 10 mm in 5 patients.

Conclusion

THA with Ribbed femoral stem prosthesis can achieve satisfactory effectiveness with good initial stability and rapid bone growth. The incidence of stress shielding is relatively high, but the stress shielding has no significant impact on the mid- and long-term survival rate and effectiveness of femoral prosthesis.