European review for medical and pharmacological sciences · 2022
Treatment options for proximal periprosthetic femoral fractures in Total Hip Arthroplasty: a single center experience.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Marino S, Giuliani A, De Mauro D, Rovere G, Smakaj A, Sassara G M, Are L, Maccauro G, Liuzza F
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Proximal periprosthetic femoral fractures (PPFFs) are gradually increasing and surgical management is often associated with high risk of complications, due to elderly population and associated comorbidities.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively assessed 39 patients at least at 2-years follow-up. We identified two study groups, similar for demographic data. Group A included patients surgically treated without involving prosthetic implants, whereas Group B included patients in which an implant revision was performed.
RESULTS: Data were recorded from January 2017 to February 2020, and 39 patients were included: 30 females (76.9%) and 9 males (23.1%), with a confirmed diagnosis of periprosthetic fracture of the proximal femur. 23 (58.9%) patients were treated with Open Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF), 12 (30.7%) with revision surgery and 4 (10.3%) were treated by modular megaprosthesis.
CONCLUSIONS: The treatment options considered in the study, revision arthroplasty and internal fixation had shown no significant differences as a matter of clinical outcomes and postoperative complications.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively assessed 39 patients at least at 2-years follow-up. We identified two study groups, similar for demographic data. Group A included patients surgically treated without involving prosthetic implants, whereas Group B included patients in which an implant revision was performed.
RESULTS: Data were recorded from January 2017 to February 2020, and 39 patients were included: 30 females (76.9%) and 9 males (23.1%), with a confirmed diagnosis of periprosthetic fracture of the proximal femur. 23 (58.9%) patients were treated with Open Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF), 12 (30.7%) with revision surgery and 4 (10.3%) were treated by modular megaprosthesis.
CONCLUSIONS: The treatment options considered in the study, revision arthroplasty and internal fixation had shown no significant differences as a matter of clinical outcomes and postoperative complications.