Management of intraoperative acetabular fracture in primary total hip arthroplasty

Intraoperative Acetabular Fractures in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Management and Functional Outcomes

PURPOSE

Intraoperative acetabular fracture (IAF) is a non-common complication of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Despite the prevalence of intraoperative periprosthetic fractures are increasing, little has been written about this type of fracture. The main objective is to analyze possible risk factors, treatment options and functional outcomes associated with IAF.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2020, 4 senior arthroplasty surgeons performed 5540 uncemented primary THA. We reviewed our Total Joint Registry and found 18 cases with an IAF. We analyzed demographic factors, medical history, preoperative diagnose, acetabular cups designs, anatomic location of the fracture, treatment, associated complications and functional outcomes. The minimum duration of follow-up was 12 months.

RESULTS

The prevalence of an IAF was 0,3%. All the acetabular cups were hemispherical modular. The most frequent acetabular cup associated with an IAF was the CSF Plus (JRI). In two cases the acetabular components were judged to be stable and no additional treatment was done. In the other sixteen patients, various surgical procedures were carried out. Almost 30% of patients that sustained an IAF had some complication during their follow up. Moreover, poor functionality outcomes were obtained (12.1 ± 4.1). in the final follow up accordance to Postel Merle d'Aubingé score.

CONCLUSION

Although IAF is a rare complication of THA, maintaining a high index of suspicion is important as they can be difficult to identify. Still with an adequate early treatment they have poor functionality and high risk of associated complications.

Ipsilateral pubic ramus fracture during total hip arthroplasty is not rare: does it matter?

INTRODUCTION

Periprosthetic fractures in total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been well described and studied. However, there is a lack of reports on ipsilateral pubic ramus fractures during THA due to the rare occurrence of such fractures and ambiguity of symptoms. With the use of postoperative computed tomography (CT) examinations, we have identified that asymptomatic ipsilateral pubic ramus fractures occur frequently during THA. This study aims to evaluate the incidence, location, clinical outcomes, and risk factors of ipsilateral pubic ramus fractures during THA.

METHODS

From May 2022 to March 2023, a single surgeon performed 203 THAs in 183 patients at a single institution. All patients underwent postoperative CT scans three days after THA. The patients with ipsilateral pubic ramus fractures were followed up for a minimum of six months. Basic demographics, osteoporosis, general conditions of the operations, and outcomes of THA were investigated in all patients.

RESULTS

Twenty-two cases (10.8%) of ipsilateral pubic ramus fractures were identified on postoperative CT scans. All fractures were located near the origin of the superior or inferior pubic ramus. Five fractures were detected on simple postoperative radiographs. The fractures did not cause any further complications at a minimum of six-month postoperative follow-up. Univariate and multivariate analyses did not identify any risk factors associated with these fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the incidence of ipsilateral pubic ramus fractures during THA is high, treatment is not required as they do not cause any significant clinical symptoms or affect the prognosis of THA. However, the possibility of occurrence of these fractures must be explained to the patients before surgery.

Incidence and outcomes of intraoperative periprosthetic acetabular fractures during cementless total hip arthroplasty: a prospective three-dimensional computer tomography-based study

PURPOSE

Unlike periprosthetic femoral fractures, periprosthetic acetabular fractures during total hip arthroplasty (THA) have not been evaluated in detail. We prospectively evaluated the incidence, patterns, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of intraoperative periprosthetic acetabular fractures using pre- and postoperative computer tomography (CT).

METHODS

In this prospective single-centre study, we evaluated 234 consecutive patients (250 hips) who underwent THA and three-dimensional CT before and after the surgery. We assessed the incidence, pattern of fractures, outcomes for each fracture pattern, reoperation and revision rates, Harris hip score, and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Multivariate regression models were used to identify risk factors for periprosthetic acetabular fractures.

RESULTS

In total, 43 periprosthetic acetabular fractures (17.2%) were identified via CT. Fractures occurred most frequently at the superolateral wall. Early cup migration occurred in three hips. None of the patients underwent revision surgery for acetabular loosening. Regression modeling showed that rheumatoid arthritis was a significant predictor of periprosthetic acetabular fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

Periprosthetic acetabular fractures are not infrequent during cementless THA and are more common in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Global mapping of institutional and hospital-based (Level II-IV) arthroplasty registries: a scoping review

PURPOSE

Four joint arthroplasty registries (JARs) levels exist based on the recorded data type. Level I JARs are national registries that record primary data. Hospital or institutional JARs (Level II-IV) document further data (patient-reported outcomes, demographic, radiographic). A worldwide list of Level II-IV JARs must be created to effectively assess and categorize these data.

METHODS

Our study is a systematic scoping review that followed the PRISMA guidelines and included 648 studies. Based on their publications, the study aimed to map the existing Level II-IV JARs worldwide. The secondary aim was to record their lifetime, publications' number and frequency and recognise differences with national JARs.

RESULTS

One hundred five Level II-IV JARs were identified. Forty-eight hospital-based, 45 institutional, and 12 regional JARs. Fifty JARs were found in America, 39 in Europe, nine in Asia, six in Oceania and one in Africa. They have published 485 cohorts, 91 case-series, 49 case-control, nine cross-sectional studies, eight registry protocols and six randomized trials. Most cohort studies were retrospective. Twenty-three per cent of papers studied patient-reported outcomes, 21.45% surgical complications, 13.73% postoperative clinical and 5.25% radiographic outcomes, and 11.88% were survival analyses. Forty-four JARs have published only one paper. Level I JARs primarily publish implant revision risk annual reports, while Level IV JARs collect comprehensive data to conduct retrospective cohort studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study mapping all Level II-IV JARs worldwide. Most JARs are found in Europe and America, reporting on retrospective cohorts, but only a few report on studies systematically.

Periprosthetic acetabular fractures as a complication of total hip arthroplasty

Periprosthetic acetabular fractures are rare but potentially devastating complications of total hip arthroplasty. As the number of total hip arthroplasties performed annually increases, so has the incidence of periprosthetic fractures, with the topic being spotlighted more frequently in the orthopaedic community. There is a particular sparsity of literature regarding periprosthetic acetabular fractures, with periprosthetic femoral fractures after total hip arthroplasty being traditionally far more commonly reported. This article aims to provide an up-to-date review of the epidemiology, risk factors, diagnostic challenges, classifications, and management strategies for periprosthetic acetabular fractures after total hip arthroplasty.

Management of Periprosthetic Acetabular Fractures: A Critical Analysis and Review of the Literature

➢

Periprosthetic acetabular fractures are uncommon and infrequently the focus of studies.

➢

Acetabular fractures are occasionally recognized postoperatively when patients report unremitting groin pain weeks after surgery.

➢

The widespread use of cementless acetabular cups might lead to a higher number of fractures than are clinically detectable.

➢

Appropriate recognition, including mindfulness of preoperative patient and surgical risk factors, is critical to the successful management of acetabular complications.

Static and dynamic examination of a locking plate in various setups for the stabilization of bone shaft fractures, including periprosthetic

Introduction: Hip and knee arthroplasty, formerly known as the “gold standard” in the treatment of articular cartilage damage, after a period of being highly popular, are changing the way they are perceived over time due to their related complications. The number of complications is directly proportional to the number of prostheses placed. This is the case of numerus arthroplasty surgeries, also involving other joints. Since there is no tissue compatibility between the metal prosthesis and the bone tissue, the former represents a negative biological element that hinders the healing of the fracture. Objective of the study: The study aims at addressing the following questions: 1. What is the elasticity of the fixation with a locking plate depending on the number of screws in both fragments, in the case of interfractural diastasis?, 2. What is the elasticity of the fixation with a locking plate depending on the number of screws in both fragments, in the case of fracture-on-fracture compression? 3. What is the difference in elasticity of the fixation using the cable system on a fracture with prosthesis?, 4. Determining the influence of different stabilization setups with the locking plate screws on the spacing of the fracture on the static and dynamic experimental model, 5. Is it possible to achieve elasticity of the stabilization stimulating bone union in a plate-based fixation, and when? Material and methods: The study was performed in the research laboratory of ChM. The subject of the study was the ChM 5.0 ChLP straight narrow compression locking plate with limited contact L-238, holes-15. The plate was mounted using ChM 3.5 locking screws: 5.0 ChLP 3.5 x 18T self-tapping screw and 5.0 ChLP 3.5 x 36T self-tapping screw. The test was carried out under static and dynamic conditions. Results and Conclusions: 1. The elasticity of the fixation with a locking plate at the interfractural diastasis is inversely proportional to the number of screws (plate deflection), 2. The elasticity of the fixation with a locking plate at the fracture-on-fracture compression is inversely proportional to the number of screws (fracture-on-fracture compression), 3. Application of the “cable system” on the fracture with prosthesis and the derotation screw optimizes the elasticity of the fixation and seems to be an optimal solution (in periprosthetic fractures), 4. Studies on the experimental static and dynamic model demonstrated that placing screws in all the openings of the plate is a restrained/clinically useless fixation. 5. The elasticity of the stabilization stimulating bone union can be obtained in the plate fixation supported by the "cable system".