Introduction and Objective. Some periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) present history and radiographic aspect consistent with an atypical femoral fracture (AFF), fulfilling the criteria for AFF except that PFFs by themselves are excluded from the diagnosis of AFFs. The aim of this study was to evaluate in a single Institution series of PFFs if any of them could be considered a periprosthetic atypical femoral fracture (PAFF), and their prevalence. Materials and Methods. Surgical records were searched for PFFs around a primary hip stem from January 2013 to December 2019. Cases were classified according to Vancouver classification. Demographic and medical history were extracted. Fisher's exact test was used for statistical analysis. Results. One-hundred-fifteen PFFs were identified, 59 of them were type B1 and 16 were type C. Radiographs and medical records were available for all patients. Twenty-four patients (32%) have been treated with bisphosphonates (BPs) for longer than 4 years. Four patients presented a fracture with characteristics of PAFF. When enlarged to all PFFs of the series, no other PAFF was found: prevalence of PAFFs was 5.3% for type B1 and C cases and 3.5% for all surgically treated PFFs. Statistical significative difference between PAFFs and PFFs was found for prolonged BPs assumption and for the level of fracture clear of the stem. Conclusions. Fracture with characteristics of AFFs can also happen over a prosthetic stem, configuring themselves as PAFFs, and they are related to prolonged BPs use. As a correct diagnosis is mandatory for proper treatment, a revision of criteria for AFFs should be considered, accepting that PAFFs exist

Abstract. Objective. To estimate the effect of calcar collar separation on the likelihood of calcar collar contact during in vitro periprosthetic fracture. Methods. Three groups of six composite femurs were implanted with a collared cementless femoral stem. Neck resection was increased between groups (group 1 = normal, group 2 = 3mm additional, group 3 = 6mm additional), to simulate failure to obtain calcar collar contact. Prior to each trial, the distances between anterior (ACC) and posterior (PCC) collar and the calcar were measured. Periprosthetic fractures of the femur were simulated using a previously published technique. High speed video recording identified when collar to calcar contact (CCC) occurred. The ACC and PCC were compared between trials where the CCC was and was not achieved. Regression estimated the odds of failing to achieve CCC for a given ACC or PCC. Results. CCC was achieved prior to fracture in all cases in group one, 50% in group two and 0% in group three. The median (range) ACC for those trials where CCC was achieved was 0.40 (0.00, 3.37) mm versus 6.15 (3.06 to 6.88) mm, where CCC was not achieved (p <0.01). The median (range) PCC for those trials where CCC was achieved was 0.85 (0.00 to 3.71) mm versus 5.97 (2.23 to 7.46) mm, where CCC was not achieved (p <0.01). Binomial logistic regression estimated risk of failure to obtain CCC increased 3.8 fold (95% confidence interval 1.6 to 30.2, p <0.05) for each millimetre of PCC. Conclusions. Increased separation between collar and calcar reduced the likelihood of calcar collar contact during a simulated periprosthetic fracture of the femur. Surgeons should aim to achieve a calcar-collar distance of less than 1mm following implantation to ensure calcar collar contact during periprosthetic femoral fracture and to reduce the risk of fracture. Declaration of Interest. (a) fully declare any financial or other potential conflict of interest

Periprosthetic femoral fractures can occur as a complication of total hip arthroplasty and are often challenging to treat as the mechanical scenario is influenced by the presence of the metal prosthesis within the bone. This research focuses on finding the optimum fixation for transverse, Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic fractures, stabilised using locking plates and secured using screws. The aim of this study was to experimentally validate a computer model of a human femur, develop that model to represent a periprosthetic femoral fracture fixation and show how the model could be used to indicate differences between plating techniques. In the first development stage, both a laboratory model and a finite element model were developed to evaluate the mechanical behaviour of an intact composite femur under axial loading. Axial strains were recorded along the medial length of the femur in both cases and compared to provide validation for the computational model predications. The computational intact femur model was then modified to include a cemented total hip replacement, and further adapted to include a periprosthetic fracture stabilised using a locking plate, with unicortical screws above, and bicortical screws below the transverse fracture. For the intact femur case, the experimental and computational strain patterns correlated well with an average difference of 16%. Following the inclusion of the stem, there was a reduction in the strain in the region of the prosthesis reducing by an average of 45%. There was also a large increase in bulk stiffness with the introduction of the prosthesis. When the fracture and plate fixation were included, there was little difference in the proximal strain where the stem dominated, and the strains in the distal region were found to be highly sensitive to the distribution of the screws. The results of this study indicate that screw configuration is an important factor in periprosthetic fracture fixation. A laboratory model of the periprosthetic facture case is now under development to further validate the computational models and the two approaches will then be used to determine optimum fixation methods for a range of clinical scenarios

SUMMARY. We report a prospective study of clinical data collected pre, intra and post operation to remove both cup and head components of 118 failed, current generation metal on metal (MOM) hips. Whilst component position was important, the majority were unexplained failures and of these the majority (63%) had cup inclination angles of less than 55 degrees. Poor biocompatibility of the wear debris may explain many of the failures. BACKGROUND. Morlock et al reported a retrospective analysis of 267 MOM hips but only 34 head and cup couples (ie most were femoral neck fractures) and without data necessary to define cause of failure. The commonest cause of failure in the National Joint Registry (NJR) is unexplained. METHODS. We categorised the cause of failure, as defined by the NJR, of all MOM hips received over an 18 month period that had a full set of pre, intra and post op data. A group of 40 patients with unilateral well functioning MOM hips was used for comparison. RESULTS. In the retrieval group, the median age was 61 years (25 to 87) and there were 80 females and 38 males. The median time between primary and revision operation was 35 months (4 to 121). Femoral head size was <50mm in 89 and >=50mm in 29. The causes of failure were: unexplained in 75; aseptic loosening (acetabular) in 12; aseptic loosening (femoral) in 7; dislocation/subluxation in 1; infection in 11; periprosthetic femoral fracture in 2; malalignment in 6; size mismatch in 3; other in 1. 47 (63%) of unexplained failures had cup inclination angles of less than 55 degrees. The unexplained failures had increased blood metal ions (p <0.0001) and cup inclination angle (p <0.005) but a decreased femoral head size (p <0.0001) when compared to well functioning MOM hip patients. CONCLUSION. The commonest cause of failed MOM hips was unexplained. Comparison to well functioning hips revealed that the mechanism may involve high blood metal ions but high cup inclination angle was not found in the majority of cases. Further biological and mechanical investigation into the underlying mechanism of failure is required