Dataset Information

Does Surgical Repair Benefit Pipkin Type I Femoral Head Fractures?: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Background: Femoral head fractures are rare injuries with or without traumatic dislocations. The management of these fractures is crucial to prevent the development of severe complications and to achieve optimal functional outcomes. Wide treatment options for Pipkin 1 femoral head fractures range from fragment excision, fixation following open reduction with internal fixation, or conservative treatment such as close reduction alone after fracture dislocation. However, the best decision making remains controversial not only due to lack of large trials, but also inconsistent results reported. Therefore, we aim to compare the operative with nonoperative outcomes of Pipkin type 1 patients. Patients and Methods: We systemically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations to identify studies assessing outcomes of Pipkin type 1 patients after conservative treatment, and open reduction with excision or fixation. Data on comparison of clinical outcomes of each management were extracted including arthritis, heterotopic ossification (HO), avascular necrosis (AVN), and functional scores (Thompson Epstein, Merle' d Augine and Postel Score). We performed a meta-analysis with the available data. Results: Eight studies (7 case series and 1 RCT) were included in this study. In a pooled analysis, the overall rate of arthritis was 37% (95% CI, 2-79%), HO was 20% (95% CI, 2-45%), and AVN was 3% (95% CI, 0-16%). In comparison of management types, the excision group reached the best functional outcomes including Thompson Epstein Score (poor to worse, 9%; 95% CI, 0-27%) and Merle d' Aubigne and Postel Score (poor to worse, 18%; 95% CI, 3-38%); ORIF group had the highest AVN rate (11%; 95% CI, 0-92%); conservative treatment had the highest arthritis rate (67%; 95% CI: 0-100%) and lowest HO rate (2%; 95% CI, 0-28%). Discussion: This meta-analysis demonstrates that different procedures lead to various clinical outcomes: fragment excision may achieve better function, conservative treatment may result in a higher arthritis rate, while ORIFs may have a higher AVN rate. These findings may assist surgeons in tailoring their decision-making to specific patient profiles. Future RCTs with multicenter efforts are needed to validate associations found in this study. Level of Evidence: II, systematic review and meta-analysis.

SUBMITTER: Tsai SHL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8780341 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceSurgical management of periarticular knee fractures can be challenging, and adverse outcomes may be severe. Recent literature indicates that the rate of periarticular knee surgical site infection (SSI) may range from 2% to 88% depending on the fracture site.ObjectiveTo examine the prevalence of deep SSI and the rate of septic arthritis after surgical repair of fractures around the knee.Data sourcesThe electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from their inception to July 1, 2018.Study selectionEligible studies had to specifically report deep SSI rates and include fractures in the distal femur, patella, tibial plateau, or proximal tibia. Risk factors that were associated with increased the risk of deep SSI were also examined.Data extraction and synthesisThis study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Data were extracted by multiple investigators. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software was used for the pooling of data, using either random-effects or fixed-effects models, with respect to the degree of statistical heterogeneity present. Data analyses were conducted in October 2019.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was overall prevalence of deep SSI after periarticular knee fracture repair. The secondary outcomes were the overall prevalence of septic arthritis, risk factors associated with deep SSI, and the most commonly cultured bacteria specimens found periarticular knee infections.ResultsOf 6928 articles screened, 117 articles met inclusion criteria and were included in analysis. Among 11?432 patients included in analysis, 653 patients (5.7%) experienced deep SSIs, most commonly among patients with proximal tibia fractures (56 of 872 patients [6.4%]). Among studies that included information on septic arthritis, 38 of 1567 patients (2.4%) experienced septic arthritis. The 2 most commonly reported bacteria were methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, found in 67 SSIs, and methicillin-susceptible S aureus, found in 53 SSIs. Sixty-two studies (53.0%) in the sample received a Coleman Methodological Score of poor (<50 points).Conclusions and relevanceDeep SSIs occurred in nearly 6% of periarticular knee fracture repairs, and 2.4% of SSIs were associated with septic arthritis. Surgeons managing these injuries should be vigilant when wounds are not pristine. Efforts should be made to elevate the quality of research conducted not only in this subject but also in orthopedic surgery as a whole.

Project description:Femoral head fractures are rare injuries; incongruency and instability are indications for surgical intervention. Anterior, posterior, and transtrochanteric surgical approaches have been proposed, but the exposure is limited with classical approaches. Surgical hip dislocation allows for a 360° view of the head and may facilitate a reduction in selected head fractures, but to our knowledge, few studies have reported on the results with this technique. We therefore report on the (1) quality of fracture reduction; (2) modified Harris hip score at a minimum of 2 years (mean, 6 years, range, 26-122 months); and (3) frequency of complications, including avascular necrosis (AVN), arthritis development, and heterotopic ossification, in a case series of patients with femoral head fractures treated with this approach.The procedure involves digastric trochanteric flip osteotomy and safe dislocation of the femoral head, preserving its vessels. Using this technique we are able to reduce all displaced femoral head fractures under direct view. Definitive fixation is performed through this approach with 2.7-mm nonabsorbable screws. The same technique may be used also for Pipkin IV fractures to fix transverse, T-type, posterior wall, or posterior column acetabular fracture.Between 2004 and 2011, we used this approach to manage all displaced femoral head fractures in patients younger than 55 years old. A total of 17 patients were thus treated; of those three were lost to followup before 2 years, and one was excluded from study because of severe preoperative neurological impairment, leaving 13 for analysis here. Patient demographic, injury, and surgical variables as well as complications were recorded and retrospectively evaluated. Radiographic outcome was scored according to Matta's criteria on postoperative radiographs. Outcomes were evaluated with the modified Harris hip score. Minimum followup was 24 months (mean, 77 months; SD, 32.8 months).Fracture reduction was anatomic in eight hips and imperfect in five. Mean clinical score was 82 points (SD, 7.7). One patient developed symptomatic femoral head AVN and underwent total hip arthroplasty 4 years after the index procedure; no other patient underwent arthroplasty. Besides this patient, signs of arthritis (Grade I according to Tönnis classification) were found in one patient and heterotopic ossification was recorded in two patients, but neither was symptomatic.Our experience with surgical dislocation shows clinical results comparable to previously reported outcomes in femoral head fractures treated with common approaches; we also present a similar rate of AVN and a lower rate of posttraumatic arthritis, but a higher risk of heterotopic ossification. Further case-control studies are necessary to confirm these statements.Level IV, therapeutic study.

Project description:Background and objectivesTreatment of benign osteolytic lesions in the femoral head and neck can be extremely challenging, particularly in children with open physis or for aggressive tumors with pathological fracture. There remains the difficult management decision as to whether to perform complete excision of the involved area or only curettage. Moreover, there is no agreed consensus on the optimal approach to lesion access when performing curettage, which included the transcervical, open and direct approach. The current systematic review aims to provide guidance for selection of surgical methods in clinical practice by comparing the advantages and drawbacks of different procedures.MethodsA comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases were executed for human studies restricted to the English language. The search was filtered to include studies published from January 1980 to January 2020.ResultsA total of 33 articles including 274 patients were enrolled in the final analysis. The most common diagnosis was chondroblastoma (CBT) (104, 38.0%), followed by giant cell tumor (GCT) (56, 20.4%). There were 57 (20.8%) patients with pathological fracture. Intralesional curettage was performed in 257 (93.8%) patients with the local recurrence of 12.5% at the mean follow-up of 51.5 months. The patients who were presented with open physis or curetted via transcervical approach developed higher local recurrence in patients with CBT (P < 0.001). The local recurrence rate of GCT is 33.3% after curettage, while 8 of 9 (88.9%) patients with fracture were treated successfully with joint preservation. Two of 45 (4.4%) patients developed avascular necrosis (AVN) of femoral head after surgical hip dislocation. The reported Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) Score was comparable among patients with different approaches to curettage.ConclusionThe majority of benign osteolytic lesions in the femoral head and neck can be treated with intralesional curettage with acceptable local tumor control and satisfactory function. The incidence of local recurrence might be decreased dramatically for lesion access under direct visualization. The native joint maintenance could be achieved even in patients with aggressive lesions presenting pathological fracture.

Project description:Atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) are uncommon and have been associated particularly with long-term antiresorptive therapy, including bisphosphonates. Although the pathogenesis of AFFs is unknown, their identification in bisphosphonate-naïve individuals and in monogenetic bone disorders has led to the hypothesis that genetic factors predispose to AFF. Our aim was to review and summarize the evidence for genetic factors in individuals with AFF. We conducted structured literature searches and hand-searching of conference abstracts/reference lists for key words relating to AFF and identified 2566 citations. Two individuals independently reviewed citations for (i) cases of AFF in monogenetic bone diseases and (ii) genetic studies in individuals with AFF. AFFs were reported in 23 individuals with the following 7 monogenetic bone disorders (gene): osteogenesis imperfecta (COL1A1/COL1A2), pycnodysostosis (CTSK), hypophosphatasia (ALPL), X-linked osteoporosis (PLS3), osteopetrosis, X-linked hypophosphatemia (PHEX), and osteoporosis pseudoglioma syndrome (LRP5). In 8 cases (35%), the monogenetic bone disorder was uncovered after the AFF occurred. Cases of bisphosphonate-naïve AFF were reported in pycnodysostosis, hypophosphatasia, osteopetrosis, X-linked hypophosphatemia, and osteoporosis pseudoglioma syndrome. A pilot study in 13 AFF patients and 268 controls identified a greater number of rare variants in AFF cases using exon array analysis. A whole-exome sequencing study in 3 sisters with AFFs showed, among 37 shared genetic variants, a p.Asp188Tyr mutation in the GGPS1 gene in the mevalonate pathway, critical to osteoclast function, which is also inhibited by bisphosphonates. Two studies completed targeted ALPL gene sequencing, an ALPL heterozygous mutation was found in 1 case of a cohort of 11 AFFs, whereas the second study comprising 10 AFF cases did not find mutations in ALPL. Targeted sequencing of ALPL, COL1A1, COL1A2, and SOX9 genes in 5 cases of AFF identified a variant in COL1A2 in 1 case. These findings suggest a genetic susceptibility for AFFs. A large multicenter collaborative study of well-phenotyped AFF cases and controls is needed to understand the role of genetics in this uncommon condition.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Hip arthroplasty (HA) is commonly performed to treat various hip pathologies. Its volume is expected to rise further due to the increasing age of the population. Complication rates are low; however, periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFF) are a rare, albeit serious, complication with substantial economic impact. While current guidelines propose revision with long-stemmed prostheses for all Vancouver B2 and B3 PFF, some recent research papers suggest that open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) could lead to an equivalent outcome. Our aim was to summarize the evidence, elucidating under which circumstances ORIF leads to a favorable outcome after B2 and B3 PFF compared with revision surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS:A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies on patients treated with ORIF and with stem revision after B2 and/or B3 fractures. Extracted information included initial pathology, stem fixation mechanism, bone quality and stem stability at the time of PFF, clinical outcomes, and mortality. Results of individual studies were summarized in a table in lieu of a quantitative data synthesis due to a lack of standardized information. RESULTS:We identified 14 original research articles including both patients treated with ORIF and with stem revision after B2 and/or B3 PFF. Five studies included statistical comparisons, all were in favor of ORIF or indeterminate. The common lack of rigorous statistical analyses and significant methodological weaknesses made identification of outcome predictors impossible. CONCLUSION:The choice of treatment modality for PFF depends on fracture, implant, and bone characteristics. Recent data show that successful outcome can be achieved without revising loose stems. ORIF may be a viable option if bone stock is adequate around uncemented or tapered polished stems with an intact cement mantle and the fracture geometry allows stable anatomic reconstruction. Conceptional considerations support this idea, but more data are needed to identify outcome predictors.

Project description:IntroductionFractures of the proximal femur accompanied by a fracture of the femoral shaft are relatively rare, with a reported prevalence between 1 and 12%. Multiple surgical options are available, consisting of treatment with a single implant or with double implants. Controversy exists about the optimal management. A systematic review and pooled analysis were performed to assess the most reliable treatment for bifocal femoral fractures of the femur.Materials and methodsA literature search was conducted on July 15, 2022. Selected studies were screened on title and abstract by two researchers independently, and full texts were read by both authors. Emphasis was put on adverse events such as postoperative infection, healing complications, malalignment, and functional outcome using either a single implant or double implants.ResultsFor the proximal femoral fractures, no significant difference could be confirmed for avascular necrosis of the femoral neck (5.1% for single implant and 3.8% for double implants), nonunion (6.4% for single implant and 7.8% for double implants), or varus malalignment (6.6% for single implant and 10.9% for double implants). This study also suggests that the number of implants is irrelevant for complications of the femoral shaft regarding the rates of postoperative infection and healing complications. Pooled rates of bone healing complications were 1.6-2.7-fold higher when patients were treated with a single implant, but statistical significance could not be confirmed. For hardware failure, revision surgery, leg length discrepancy, and functional outcome, no difference between the two groups was found either.ConclusionsThe pooled proportions of all postoperative complications had overlapping confidence intervals; thus, no inference about a statistically significant difference on the number of implants used for treating ipsilateral fractures of the femur can be made. Both treatment groups showed a similar functional outcome at the last moment of follow-up, with more than 75% of the patients reporting a good outcome.

Dataset Information

Does Surgical Repair Benefit Pipkin Type I Femoral Head Fractures?: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets