Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

PERI-PROSTHETIC FRACTURES IN UNCEMENTED HIP HEMIATHROPLASTY, A DGH ANALYSIS OF PREDISPOSITION, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR PATIENT SELECTION

British Orthopaedic Trainee Association (BOTA)



Abstract

Displaced fractures of the neck of femur are routinely treated in the elderly by either cemented hemiarthoplasty, in the fit, or uncemented hemiarthroplasty, in the less fit. In Scotland the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) guidelines are followed to identify which patients should have a cemented prosthesis. This is based on cardiovascular status, and the age and fragility of the patient. An uncemented prosthesis should be a final operation. A peri-prosthetic fracture is considered a failure of treatment as the patient then has to undergo an operation with a far greater surgical insult.

We looked at all neck of femur fractures over a period of Jan 2007 to June 2010. The number of the peri-prosthetic fractures for uncemented hip hemiarthroplasties was established and a case note review was carried out.

There was 1397 neck of femur fractures. 546 hemiarthroplasties were carried out, of which 183 were cemented, and 363 uncemented. 14 patients (4% of uncemented hemiarthoplasties) had peri-prosthetic fractures. The case notes of these patients were analysed.

We found there was a common link of significant cardiovascular risk, lack of falls assessment (only 14% of patients had a completed falls assessment and 35% sustained their fracture during an admission to hospital) and confusion (43% had a degree of dementia that caused significant confusion).

Cemented implants should be considered in those who have failed falls assessment, or are confused; even if the cardiovascular risk is significant. This decision should be made in conjunction with a senior anaesthetist. This is being implemented in our unit and a prospective audit is being carried out over the same time period (July 2010 to Dec 2013) to assess the benefit.