Is internal fixation alone advantageous in selected B2 periprosthetic fractures?
ANZ Journal of Surgery, ISSN: 1445-2197, Vol: 85, Issue: 3, Page: 169-173
2015
- 47Citations
- 65Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations47
- Citation Indexes47
- 47
- CrossRef35
- Captures65
- Readers65
- 65
Article Description
Background: Revision surgery is currently the recommended treatment for Vancouver B2 femoral periprosthetic fractures, but isolated open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) might be an effective treatment for these fractures around cemented collarless polished tapered (CCPT) stems, as these stems can re-engage in the cement mantle, regaining stability following internal fixation. The aim of this study was to determine the operative risks, post-operative complications, and radiographic and functional outcomes in two cohorts of Vancouver B2 femoral fractures around CCPT stems treated either by ORIF alone or revision surgery. Methods: The results of 12 patients with B2 periprosthetic fractures around a CCPT stems treated by ORIF alone (median follow-up 67 months) were compared with those of nine patients with a similar fracture treated by revision surgery (median follow-up 59 months). Results: All fractures treated by ORIF alone healed and all stems restabilized and remained stable within their original cement mantle. These patients had significantly shorter overall operating room times (P = 0.002), surgical times (P = 0.002) and required fewer units of blood transfusion (P = 0.008) than patients in the revision cohort. In the ORIF cohort, one patient had two dislocations. In the revision cohort, one patient had delayed wound healing, a second patient had delayed wound healing and two dislocations, and a third patient had two dislocations. Conclusion: Although further studies with larger numbers are required, treatment of these fractures with ORIF alone may be a viable alternative to revision surgery as it reduces the operative risks involved.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know