Periprosthetic Fractures
Conditions
Brief summary
The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical (range of motion, weight bearing, quality of life) and radiographic outcome (boney consolidation) between open reduction and internal fixation using locking compression plates with revision prosthesis using a non-cemented long femoral stem in a group of patients with a Vancouver type-B2, B3 and C periprosthetic fracture after primary total hip replacement.
Interventions
PROCEDUREOperation for Periprosthetic fractures of the hip with stem loosening
Sponsors
Medical University of Vienna
Study design
Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
RETROSPECTIVE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Patients with Vancouver type- BlI, BIII and C fractures and unstable femoral prosthesis stem.
Exclusion criteria
* Patients with pathological fractures, * Vancouver type-A, Bl, and * stable femoral prosthesis stem, * Patients with hemi - prosthesis and periprosthetic femoral fractures were excluded from final analysis.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Clinical Outcome (Range of Motion of the hip) | follow up of at least 1 year | Range of Motion of the hip |
| Radiographic Outcome (boney consolidation of the fracture) | follow up of at least 1 year | boney consolidation of the fracture after 3 month, 6 month and at least 1 year after the operation |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Patient's Mobility (assessed by the Parker's Mobility Score) | follow up of at least 1 year | Patient's Mobility assessed by the Parker's Mobility Score |
Outcome results
None listed