Internal Fixation Versus Hemiarthroplasty for Nondisplaced Femoral Neck Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Traumaplasty: When and How to Perform Acute Arthroplasty for Fractures Around the Hip in the Elderly Patient

Acute fractures around the hip are prevalent injuries associated with potentially devastating outcomes. The growing utilization of arthroplasty for femoral neck fractures in the elderly is likely a result of improvements in reoperation rates and postoperative function. Compared to hemiarthroplasty, total hip arthroplasty is associated with a slight functional benefit that is unlikely noticeable for many patients, as well as minimal differences in complications and patient reported outcome measures. However, the evidence supporting cement use in femoral stem fixation is robust. Multiple high power randomized controlled trial-based studies indicate cement fixation brings more predictable outcomes and fewer reoperations. In the setting of acute acetabular fracture, total hip arthroplasty is a favorable approach for elderly patients and fracture patterns associated with increased risk of revision after open reduction and internal fixation. Variations in patient characteristics and fracture patterns demand careful consideration whenever selecting the optimal treatment. In fracture patient populations, comanagement is an important consideration when seeking to reduce complications and promote cost-effective quality care.

Management of Garden-I and II Femoral Neck Fractures: Perspectives on Primary Arthroplasty

This review compares internal fixation versus arthroplasty in the treatment of nondisplaced femoral neck fractures (FNFs) calling attention to evolving areas of consensus that influence clinical decision-making. The Garden classification system, typically dichotomized into nondisplaced (types I and II) and displaced (types III and IV) fractures, has been used as a guide for surgical decision-making. Conventionally, treatment of nondisplaced FNF in the elderly has been with internal fixation, and treatment of a displaced FNF has been hemi-, or more recently total hip, arthroplasty. Studies over the last decade have raised concern over the appropriate treatment of nondisplaced FNFs due to high rates of reoperation of nondisplaced FNFs treated with internal fixation. Avascular necrosis (AVN), failure of internal fixation, secondary malunion, and pin/nail penetration through the femoral head have all been observed. Several studies have attributed fixation failure to a degree of femoral neck tilt ≥20°, either posteriorly or anteriorly as seen on the lateral X-ray. Because of these observations of fixation failures, the suggestion has been made that arthroplasty be used when the degree of posterior tilt exceeds a threshold of ≥20° tilt with the expectation of diminishing failure of fixation, decreasing the risk of reoperation and preserving function without increasing mortality rate. Frustrating additional analyses are uncertainties over the mechanisms of failure of internal fixation with ≥20° tilt and the persistently substantial 1-year mortality rate after FNF, which has not been influenced by fixation or replacement type. Due to the lack of consensus regarding the determination of the appropriate surgical intervention for nondisplaced FNFs, an improved algorithm for surgical decision-making for these fractures may prove useful.

Safe range of femoral neck system insertion and the risk of perforation

BACKGROUND

Internal fixation of the femoral neck carries a risk of perforation due to the presence of the isthmus of the femoral neck. At present, there are few studies on the safe and risk zones of the femoral neck system (FNS) implantation. This study aimed to recommend the safe range of injection of FNS in the lateral wall of the proximal femur, parallel to the axis of the femoral neck, during FNS treatment of femoral neck fracture (FNF).

METHODS

Femoral computed tomography (CT) data of 80 patients (male: 40; female: 40) who met the inclusion criteria were collected. Mimics 21.0 software was used to complete the modeling. 3-Matic 13.0 software was used to establish the axis of the femoral neck and its vertical plane, perform the cutting of the femoral neck, and project it on the vertical plane of the femoral neck axis. After matching a rectangle for each projection map, all sample sizes (80 cases) were standardized and superimposed to obtain gradient maps of the safe zone (SZ) and dangerous zone (RZ), thereby securing edge key points and safe FNS insertion range.

RESULTS

In the 80 samples, the mean diameter of the smallest femoral neck section was 33.87 ± 2.32 mm for men and 29.36 ± 1.92 mm for women. All 80 femoral necks had safe and risky areas. The SZ/S × 100% was 77.59 (± 2.22%), and the RS/S × 100% was 22.39% (± 2.22%). The risk area was composed of four parts: (1), (2), (3), and (4), respectively, corresponding to 3.45 ± 1.74%, 5.51 ± 2.63%, 6.22 ± 1.41%, and 7.22 ± 1.39%. Four marginal key points, perforation risk, and safe ranges (SR) of FNS were analyzed on the lateral wall of the femoral neck.

CONCLUSIONS

The SR of FNS placement was recommended by digital simulation. In addition, Regions (3) and (4) posed a higher risk of penetrating the cortex. Using the gradient map of RZ for preoperative evaluation is recommended to avoid iatrogenic perforation.