Revision hip arthroplasty as a treatment of Vancouver B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures without bone grafting

A technique combining "U" shape suture and shared tunneling to treat the posterior cruciate ligament rupture and posterior root tears of the medial meniscus

BACKGROUND

The standard treatment of the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) rupture accompanied with the posterior root of medial meniscus (PRMM) tears is controversial. Our research describes a minimally invasive technique for the PCL rupture accompanied with the PRMM tears.

METHODS

We described a "U" shape suture and shared tunneling technique to treat the PCL rupture accompanied with PRMM tears. Three patients (ages 28, 42, and 59 years old) who underwent this surgery have been followed up for more than 1 year at most. The MRI was done, and the hospital for special surgery (HSS) score was adopted to evaluate the clinical effect. Firstly, we built both femoral and tibial bone tunnels for the PCL reconstruction. Secondly, we used the suture hook to pass the suture line through the PRMM. Thirdly, we passed the prepared tendon through the bone tunnel and fixed the prepared tendon by an endobutton plate and an interference screw (Smith & Nephew) respectively on the side of the femur and tibia. At last, we used an endobutton plate (Smith & Nephew) outside the tibial bone tunnel to fix the PRMM.

RESULTS

These three patients did not show any complications. At 1 year after the operation, we found good knee stability, negative posterior drawer test, and normal range of motion compared with the contralateral knee joint. The MRI also showed a good union of the PRMM and PCL. The hospital for special surgery (HSS) score was 90 points.

CONCLUSIONS

With an ideal therapeutic effect, this technique is worthy to be promoted for patients with the PCL rupture and PRMM tears.

A systematic review of Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures

Aims

The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of Vancouver type B2 and B3 fractures by performing a systematic review of the methods of surgical treatment which have been reported.

Materials and Methods

A systematic search was performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. For inclusion, studies required a minimum of ten patients with a Vancouver type B2 and/or ten patients with a Vancouver type B3 fracture, a minimum mean follow-up of two years and outcomes which were matched to the type of fracture. Studies were also required to report the rate of re-operation as an outcome measure. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database.

Results

A total of 22 studies were included based on the eligibility criteria, including 343 B2 fractures and 167 B3 fractures. The mean follow-up ranged from 32 months to 74 months. Of 343 Vancouver B2 fractures, the treatment in 298 (86.8%) involved revision arthroplasty and 45 (12.6%) were treated with internal fixation alone. A total of 37 patients (12.4%) treated with revision arthroplasty and six (13.3%) treated by internal fixation only underwent further re-operation. Of 167 Vancouver B3 fractures, the treatment in 160 (95.8%) involved revision arthroplasty and eight (4.8%) were treated with internal fixation without revision. A total of 23 patients (14.4%) treated with revision arthroplasty and two (28.6%) treated only with internal fixation required re-operation.

Conclusion

A significant proportion, particularly of B2 fractures, were treated without revision of the stem. These were associated with a higher rate of re-operation. The treatment of B3 fractures without revision of the stem resulted in a high rate of re-operation. This demonstrates the importance of careful evaluation and accurate characterisation of the fracture at the time of presentation to ensure the correct management. There is a need for improvement in the reporting of data in case series recording the outcome of the surgical treatment of periprosthetic fractures. We have suggested a minimum dataset to improve the quality of data in studies dealing with these fractures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B(4 Supple B):17–25.