header advert
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Applied filters
Content I can access

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 106-B, Issue SUPP_6 | Pages 14 - 14
2 May 2024
Menakaya C Durand-Hill M Carrington R Hart A Donaldson J Miles J Briggs T Skinner J
Full Access

The management of femoral bone loss is challenging during revision hip arthroplasty. In patients with Paprosky grade IIIB and IV defects, obtaining fixation and rotational stability using traditional surgical constructs is difficult. The use of a custom-made internal proximal femoral replacement prostheses has been proposed as a solution in patients, with severe femoral bone stock loss. However, there is a paucity in the literature on their use and long-term outcomes. We report on the clinical and radiological results of our cohort.

We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent internal proximal femoral replacement for revision hip arthroplasty between April 1996 and April 2019. All patients had at least 2 years of follow-up time.

160 patients underwent limb salvage at our institution using internal proximal femoral replacement. The mean follow-up was 79.7 months (S.D 41.3). Indications for revision included periprosthetic fractures, aseptic loosening, and deep infection. The mean Oxford hip score increased from 13.8 (0–22) to 31.5 (18–43) (paired t-test, p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier prosthesis survival analysis with revision as the endpoint was 87% at 5 years. None required revision of the femoral stem. There were four dislocations (5%) and there was failure to eradicate the deep infection in four.

This technique allows instant distal fixation, allowing for early mobilisation. Long-term clinical and radiological outcomes are encouraging and the complication rates are acceptable for this patient group.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 95-B, Issue SUPP_7 | Pages 18 - 18
1 Feb 2013
Menakaya C Hadland Y Barron E Sharma H
Full Access

Introduction

The optimal treatment of high-energy tibia fractures remains controversial. The role of external fixators has been shown to be crucial. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of using either Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF) or Ilizarov frames in treatment of high-energy tibia fractures in a tertiary trauma referral centre.

Methodology

Retrospective review of consecutive series identified two treatment groups; Group 1(TSF) and Group 2 (Ilizarov). Time in frame (healing time) was defined as time from insertion to removal of frame. All patients with incomplete data secondary to loss to follow-up or death were eliminated.