Predictive factors for mortality after distal femoral fractures in the elderly: A retrospective multicenter (TRON group) study

Primary and Periprosthetic Distal Femur Fractures in Older Adults: No Difference in 12-Month Mortality and Patient-Reported Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To compare fracture incidence, mortality, and patient-reported health outcomes at 6 and 12 months postinjury between primary and periprosthetic distal femur fractures in older adults.

METHODS

A registry-based cohort study was conducted including all adults 70 years of age or older registered by the Victorian Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes Registry who experienced a primary or periprosthetic distal femur fracture between 2007 and 2017. Outcomes included mortality and health status (Three-Level European Quality of Life-Five Dimensions Scale [EQ-5D-3L]) collected at 6 and 12 months postinjury. All distal femur fractures were confirmed by radiological review. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to report associations between fracture type and mortality and health status.

RESULTS

A final cohort of 292 participants was identified. Overall mortality for the cohort was 29.8%, and no significant differences were found in mortality rate or EQ-5D-3L outcomes between fracture types (ie, primary vs. periprosthetic). A large proportion of participants reported problems across all EQ-5D-3L domains at 6 and 12 months postinjury, with slightly worse outcomes in the primary fracture group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reports high mortality and poor 12-month outcomes in an older adult cohort with both periprosthetic and primary distal femur fractures. Given these poor outcomes, fracture prevention and a greater focus on long-term rehabilitation is needed in this cohort. In addition, the involvement of an ortho-geriatrician should be considered as a routine component of care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Addressing osteoporosis treatment after hemiarthroplasty for a femoral neck fracture: impact on survival rates after a subsequent periprosthetic femoral fracture - a multicenter (TRON group) retrospective study

This study investigated the impact of osteoporosis treatment on the prognosis of patients with periprosthetic femoral fracture (PPF) following femoral neck fracture (FNF). Our results suggested an association between osteoporosis treatment and potentially improved survival prognosis in patients who underwent surgery for PPF. These results imply that osteoporosis treatment may have a beneficial effect on patient outcomes.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the effect of osteoporosis treatment on the prognosis of periprosthetic femoral fracture (PPF) patients after femoral neck fracture.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study named as TRON was conducted. The study population included 156 PPF patients who had undergone hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture between January 2010 and December 2019. Patients were divided based on whether they had received osteoporosis treatment before PPF injury. A log-rank test was used to compare survival rates. We conducted a Cox proportional hazards analysis to identify factors associated with the survival rate after PFF injury.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven of the 156 patients had received osteoporosis treatment prior to PPF injury. The 1-year and 2-year overall survival rates after PPF were 80.9% and 75.3%, respectively. The log-rank test revealed that the 1-year survival rate with and without osteoporosis treatment was 89.5% and 78.1%, respectively (P=0.012). In the Cox proportional hazards analysis, age, BMI, presence or absence of surgery, and presence or absence of osteoporosis treatment showed independent associations with the survival rate after PFF injury. The hazard ratio for the presence of osteoporosis treatment was 0.22 (95% confidence interval 0.07-0.75, P=0.015).

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggest an association between osteoporosis treatment and potentially improved survival prognosis in patients who underwent surgery for PPF. These results imply that osteoporosis treatment may have a beneficial effect on patient outcomes. It is important to consider that osteoporosis treatment could be significant not only in preventing secondary fractures but also in potentially improving prognosis in the rare event of PPF.