Revision of Total Hip Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Femur Fracture : A Report of Two Cases

Révision de Prothèse Totale de Hanche pour Fracture Périprothétique du Fémur : À Propos de Deux cas

Authors

  • Ouédraogo Souleymane 1 Service d’Orthopédie Traumatologie, CHU Sourô SANOU, Bobo-dioulasso, Burkina Faso 2 Institut Supérieur des Sciences de la Santé, Université Nazi BONI, Burkina Faso
  • Soulama Massadiami 1 Service d’Orthopédie Traumatologie, CHU Sourô SANOU, Bobo-dioulasso, Burkina Faso 2 Institut Supérieur des Sciences de la Santé, Université Nazi BONI, Burkina Faso
  • Diallo Malick 1 Service d’Orthopédie Traumatologie, CHU Sourô SANOU, Bobo-dioulasso, Burkina Faso 2 Institut Supérieur des Sciences de la Santé, Université Nazi BONI, Burkina Faso
  • Zouma Ruffin 1 Service d’Orthopédie Traumatologie, CHU Sourô SANOU, Bobo-dioulasso, Burkina Faso
  • Ouermi Ousmane 1 Service d’Orthopédie Traumatologie, CHU Sourô SANOU, Bobo-dioulasso, Burkina Faso
  • Dakouré Patrick WH 1 Service d’Orthopédie Traumatologie, CHU Sourô SANOU, Bobo-dioulasso, Burkina Faso 2 Institut Supérieur des Sciences de la Santé, Université Nazi BONI, Burkina Faso

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/hra.v2i8.5956

Keywords:

Total hip arthroplasty, Revision, Periprosthetic fracture, Burkina Faso

Abstract

RÉSUMÉ
L’objectif de ce travail était de partager à travers deux observations cliniques les alternatives possibles de révision prothétique pour fracture périprothétique du fémur dans un contexte de ressources limitées. Il s’agissait patients porteurs de prothèses totales de hanche de première intention réalisée 10 ans et 12 ans au paravent. Ils ont présenté des fractures périprothétiques du fémur classées Vancouver C et B3 respectivement. Un patient avait un descellement cotyloïdien associé. Le traitement a consisté au changement des implants fémoraux et à l’ostéosynthèse de la fracture. L’implant fémoral était constitué d’une tige standard encastrée en bilboquet dans un clou AO scié et amputé de sa partie proximale. Cette technique permettait avoir une tige de la longueur d’une tige de révision ou de reconstruction avec une possibilité de verrouillage. La stabilité de l’ensemble était assurée par une cémentation et le verrouillage distal. La cicatrisation cutanée a été effective dans les 2 cas dans un délai de 21 jours. La consolidation osseuse a été obtenue en 4 mois et 5 mois. Au recul de 18 mois et de 25 mois, le score PMA était de 11 et 12.
ABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to share, through two clinical cases, possible prosthetic revision alternatives for periprosthetic femoral fractures in a resource-limited setting. The patients had undergone primary total hip arthroplasty 10 and 12 years earlier, respectively. They presented with periprosthetic fractures classified as Vancouver C and B3, with one patient also experiencing acetabular loosening. Treatment involved replacing the femoral implants and stabilizing the fractures. The femoral implant consisted of a standard stem inserted into a modified AO nail with the proximal portion removed, providing a length comparable to a revision or reconstructive stem, with the option for locking. Stability was achieved through cementation and distal locking. Both cases achieved successful wound healing within 21 days. Bone union was achieved at 4 and 5 months postoperatively. At follow-up of 18 and 25 months, the PMA (Postoperative Morbidity Index) scores were 11 and 12, respectively.

References

Learmonth ID, Young C, Rorabeck C. The operation of the century: total hip arthroplasty. Lancet 2007;370:1508–19.

Ehlinger M, Delaunay C, Karoubi M, Bonnomet F, Ramdane N, Hamadouche M. Revision of primary total hip arthroplasty for peri-prosthetic fracture: A prospective epidemiological study of 249 consecutive cases in France. Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research 100 (2014):657–62

Ong KL, Mowat FS, Chan N, Lau E, Halpern M, Kurtz SM. Economic burden of revision hip and knee arthroplasty in Medicare enrollees. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006;446:22–8.

Francony F, Montbarbon E, Pailhé R, Duval BR, Saragaglia D. Assessment of morbidity and mortality after periprosthetic hip fracture. Influence of Vancouver stage in a retrospective single-centre study of 88 patients. Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research 108 (2022) :102985

Lucht U. The Danish hip arthroplasty register. Acta Orthop Scand 2000;71:433–9.

Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Vail TP, Berry DJ. The epidemiology of revi- sion total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone J Surg Am 2009;91: 128–33.

Malchau H, Herberts P, Eisler T, Garellick G, Soderman P. The Swedish total hip replacement register. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002;84(Suppl.):2–20.

Duncan CP, Masri BA. Fractures of the femur after hip replacement. Instr Course Lect 1995;44:293–304.

Padonou A, Chigblo P, Amossou F, Goukodadja O, Housounou R, Lawson E et al. Positionnement des Implants et Résultats Fonctionnels des Prothèses Totales de Hanche de Première Intention: à propos de 46 Cas. Health Sci. Dis 2022; 23 (3) :16-9

Thein E, Chevalley F, Borens O. Fractures périprothétiques. Rev Med Suisse 2014; 10: 2414-9

Bégué T, Thomazeau H, Adam P, et al. Fractures périprothétiques autour des prothèses du genou et de la hanche. Rev Chir Orthop 2006;Suppl. 92:S29—96.

M. Ehlinger, D. Brinkert, J. Besse, P. Adam, Y. Arlettaz, F. Bonnomet. Reversed anatomic distal femur locking plate for periprosthetic hip fracture fixation. Orthop Trauma Surg Res. 2011;97:560—4

Wroblewski M, Browne A O and Hodgkinson J P. Treatment of fracture of the shaft of the femur in total hip arthroplasty by a combination of a Kiintscher nail and a modified cemented Charnley stem. Injury 1992;23(4):225-7

Konya M N, Korkusuz F, Gokhan Maralcan1, Teyfik D and Aslan A. The use of a proximal femoral nail as a hip prosthesis: A biomechanical analysis of a newly designed implant. J Engineering in Médicine 2017;00(0) :1-

Downloads

Published

25-07-2024

How to Cite

Ouédraogo Souleymane, Soulama Massadiami, Diallo Malick, Zouma Ruffin, Ouermi Ousmane, & Dakouré Patrick WH. (2024). Revision of Total Hip Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Femur Fracture : A Report of Two Cases: Révision de Prothèse Totale de Hanche pour Fracture Périprothétique du Fémur : À Propos de Deux cas. HEALTH RESEARCH IN AFRICA, 2(8). https://doi.org/10.5281/hra.v2i8.5956

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 8 (2024): Health Research in Africa

Section

Medicine and Surgery in the Tropics

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Ouédraogo Souleymane, Soulama Massadiami, Diallo Malick, Zouma Ruffin, Ouermi Ousmane, Dakouré Patrick WH

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License  CC BY-NC-ND 4.0  that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

 

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work