Distal Femoral Replacement as a Primary Treatment Method for Distal Femoral Fractures in the Elderly

Management of Distal Femur Fractures: Replacement Versus Surgical Fixation Versus Conservative Management

INTRODUCTION

Distal femur fractures are a frequently encountered injury, especially among the ageing population. Previous studies have identified that these fractures can be managed with a variety of methods and techniques which has led to an ongoing debate and investigation to decipher the optimal approach to manage these fractures.

AIM

The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of patients managed with either distal femur replacements (DFRs), surgical fixation (SF) or conservative management. Outcomes measured included length of hospital stay, readmission rates, 30-day mortality and Oxford Knee Score.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted, of patients admitted with distal femur fractures between June 2020 and October 2022 at Huddersfield Royal Infirmary Hospital. Patients with both native and peri-prosthetic joints were included. All patient's medical data, including imaging and operative records, were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 42 patients were identified. There were six males and 36 females with a mean age of 78 years, a median age of 76 and a range of 35-102 years. Of these fractures, 15 were peri-prosthetic, and 27 were native joints. Of the patients, 30 had an SF, five had a DFR and the remaining seven were conservatively managed. Those managed with an SF had an average length of stay of 18 days, an Oxford score of 24 and two patients were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. For the DFR, the average length of stay was 16 days, an Oxford score of 22 and no patients were readmitted within 30 days. For the conservatively managed patients 21 days, an Oxford score of 25 and two patients were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. There was no 30-day mortality across all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

From our study, we can conclude that patients who managed with a DFR had the shortest length of stay in a hospital and the lowest readmission rates when compared to alternative management techniques. There was minimal difference found between the Oxford scores between all three groups. This study shows that DFR can be a safe and reliable strategy to manage distal femur fractures. Additional research is required to further compare the outcomes of these different methods of repair.

Distal femoral arthroplasty for native knee fractures : results from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry

AIMS

The aim of this study was to investigate the rate of revision for distal femoral arthroplasty (DFA) performed as a primary procedure for native knee fractures using data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Arthroplasty Registry (AOANJRR).

METHODS

Data from the AOANJRR were obtained for DFA performed as primary procedures for native knee fractures from 1 September 1999 to 31 December 2020. Pathological fractures and revision for failed internal fixation were excluded. The five prostheses identified were the Global Modular Arthroplasty System, the Modular Arthroplasty System, the Modular Universal Tumour And Revision System, the Orthopaedic Salvage System, and the Segmental System. Patient demographic data (age, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade) were obtained, where available. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival were used to determine the rate of revision, and the reasons for revision and mortality data were examined.

RESULTS

The AOANJRR identified 153 primary DFAs performed for native knee fractures in 151 patients during the study period, with 63.3% of these (n = 97) performed within the last five years. The median follow-up was 2.1 years (interquartile range 0.8 to 4.4). The patient population was 84.8% female (n = 128), with a mean age of 76.1 years (SD 11.9). The cumulative percent revision rate at three years was 10%. The most common reason for revision was loosening, followed by infection. Patient survival at one year was 87.5%, decreasing to 72.8% at three years postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

The use of DFA to treat native knee fractures is increasing, with 63.3% of cases performed within the last five years. While long-term data are not available, the results of this study suggest that DFA may be a reasonable option for elderly patients with native knee fractures where fixation is not feasible, or for whom prolonged non-weightbearing may be detrimental. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(7):894-901.