Revision Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction Internal Fixation for Distal Femur Periprosthetic Fractures: A Systematic Review
Main Article Content
Abstract
Introduction Distal femur periprosthetic fractures are a challenging complication following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Primary surgical approaches are Revision Arthroplasty (RA) and Open Reduction Internal Fixation (ORIF). RA replaces unstable prosthetic components, while ORIF preserves the prosthesis. This review aims to evaluate the outcomes of RA and ORIF.
Method This review followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Data extraction and bias assessment were performed independently.
Results Literature search resulted in 376 papers. After screening, 12 studies were included with a total of 526 patients, with 302 patients treated with ORIF and 224 with RA. ORIF patients showed a fracture union rate of 94.2% and RA patients 94.9%. Average time to union was 15.9 weeks for ORIF and 14.1 weeks for RA. Complication rates were 10% for ORIF and 10.3% for RA. Reoperation rates were 4.1% for ORIF and 4.5% for RA. Mortality rates were slightly higher in RA group (3.8%) compared to ORIF group (3.4%). ORIF patients scored higher on KSS but lower on OKS compared to RA patients.
Discussion RA shows faster time to fracture union compared to ORIF, attributed to RA’s load-sharing design which supports early weight-bearing without compromising fracture stability or healing. Literature suggests that early mobilization may reduce morbidity and enhance ambulatory recovery. Complication, reoperation, mortality, and functional scores were similar in both groups.
Conclusion Both ORIF and RA offer distinct advantages, depending on factors such as prosthetic stability and bone quality. Further researchs are required to establish proper guidelines.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
References
I. Meek RMD, Norwood T, Smith R, Brenkel IJ, Howie CR. The Risk of Peri-Prosthetic Fracture after Primary and Revision Total Hip and Knee Replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93(1):96-101. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.93B1.25087.
II. Haddad FS, Masri BA, Garbuz DS, Duncan CP. The Prevention of Periprosthetic Fractures in Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 1999;30(2):191-207. doi: 10.1016/s0030-5898(05)70074-2.
III. Yoo JD, Kim NK. Periprosthetic Fractures Following Total Knee Arthroplasty. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2015;27(1):1-9. doi:10.5792/ksrr.2015.27.1.1.
IV. Lombardo DJ, Siljander MP, Sobh A, Moore DD, Karadsheh MS. Periprosthetic fractures about total knee arthroplasty. Musculoskelet Surg. 2020 Aug;104(2):135-143. doi: 10.1007/s12306-019-00628-9. Epub 2019 Oct 23. PMID: 31643045.
V. Kim KI, Egol KA, Hozack WJ, Parvizi J. Periprosthetic Fractures After Total Knee Arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;446:167-175. doi:10.1097/01.blo.0000205894.20383.a3.
VI. Smith WR, Stoneback JW, Morgan SJ, Stahel PF. Is immediate weight bearing safe for periprosthetic distal femur fractures treated by locked plating? A feasibility study in 52 consecutive patients. Patient Saf Surg. 2016 Dec 7;10:26. doi: 10.1186/s13037-016-0114-9. PMID: 27980675; PMCID: PMC5142343.
VII. Caterini A, Luciano C, Rovere G, Ziranu A, Farsetti P, De Maio F. Periprosthetic distal femoral fractures after total knee replacement treated by ORIF. Mid to long-term follow-up study in 12 patients. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2023 Sep 29;15:87871. doi: 10.52965/001c.87871. PMID: 37786428; PMCID: PMC10542000.
VIII. Atalay IB, Ozturk R, Yapar A, Karakoc Y, Eksioglu MF. Outcomes of the Surgical Treatment of Periprosthetic Fractures Around the Knee with Locking Plates: A Single Centre Experience. Malays Orthop J. 2021 Nov;15(3):1-7. doi: 10.5704/MOJ.2111.001. PMID: 34966488; PMCID: PMC8667242.
IX. Rahuma MA, Noureddine H. The Outcome of Fixing Distal Femur Periprosthetic Fracture around Total Knee Replacement using a Locking Plate Non-Contact Bridging (NCB). Malays Orthop J. 2022 Mar;16(1):46-50. doi: 10.5704/MOJ.2203.007. PMID: 35519537; PMCID: PMC9017929.
X. Kim, W., Song, J.H. & Kim, JJ. Periprosthetic fractures of the distal femur following total knee arthroplasty: even very distal fractures can be successfully treated using internal fixation. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 39, 1951–1957 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2970-9
XI. Jassim SS, McNamara I, Hopgood P. Distal femoral replacement in periprosthetic fracture around total knee arthroplasty. Injury. 2014 Mar;45(3):550-3. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2013.10.032. Epub 2013 Nov 1. PMID: 24268192.
XII. Matar HE, Bloch BV, James PJ. Distal Femoral Replacements for Acute Comminuted Periprosthetic Knee Fractures: Satisfactory Clinical Outcomes at Medium-Term Follow-up. Arthroplast Today. 2020 Dec 25;7:37-42. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2020.11.014. PMID: 33521195; PMCID: PMC7818597.
XIII. Kamal A, Dong RJ, Shah R, Li C. Management of periprosthetic fractures of knee arthroplasty with revision surgery. J Orthop. 2020 Apr 1;22:118-123. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2020.03.061. PMID: 32322141; PMCID: PMC7167515.
XIV. Deshmukh AJ, Thakur RR, Rasquinha VJ, Rodriguez JA. Femoral Revision Arthroplasty for Su Type 3 Supracondylar Periprosthetic Knee Fractures. J Knee Surg. 2015 Aug;28(4):349-53. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1390029. Epub 2014 Sep 24. PMID: 25251878.
XV. Abbas AM, Morgan-Jones RL. Revision total knee arthroplasty for failure of primary treatment of periprosthetic knee fractures. J Arthroplasty. 2014 Oct;29(10):1996-2001. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.05.028. Epub 2014 Jun 5. PMID: 25015757.
XVI. De Marco D, Messina F, Meschini C, Oliva MS, Rovere G, Maccagnano G, Noia G, Maccauro G, Ziranu A. Periprosthetic knee fractures in an elderly population: open reduction and internal fixation vs distal femur megaprostheses. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2022 Apr 25;14(2):33772. doi: 10.52965/001c.33772. PMID: 35774922; PMCID: PMC9239368.
XVII. Kouk S, Kester BS, Behery OA, Vigdorchik JM, Schwarzkopf R. Comparison of Mortality and 30-Day Complication Rates for Patients Undergoing Fixation versus Revision Arthroplasty after Periprosthetic Fractures of the Hip and Knee. J Hip Surg. 2018 Apr 27;2(1):9-14. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1646935.
XVIII. Lex JR, Di Michele J, Sepehri A, Chuang TC. Distal femoral replacement or internal fixation for management of periprosthetic distal femur fractures: a systematic review. Knee. 2022;29:431-438. doi:10.1016/j.knee.2021.09.005.
XIX. Rubinger L, Khalik HA, Gazendam A, Ghert M, Howard J, Nauth A. Very distal femoral periprosthetic fractures: replacement versus fixation. J Orthop Trauma. 2021;35(11):561-568. doi:10.1097/BOT.0000000000002203.
XX. Onubogu IK, Relwani S, Grewal US, Bhamra JS, Reddy KG, Dhinsa BS. Distal Femoral Replacement as a Primary Treatment Method for Distal Femoral Fractures in the Elderly. Cureus. 2021 Oct 13;13(10):e18752. doi: 10.7759/cureus.18752. PMID: 34790497; PMCID: PMC8589001.
XXI. Pflüger P, Bolierakis E, Wurm M, Horst K, Pape HC. Revision rate is higher in patients with periprosthetic femur fractures following revision arthroplasty in comparison with ORIF. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2022;48(3):1803-1811. doi:10.1007/s00068-021-01733-2.
XXII. Chen AF, Choi LE, Colman MW, Goodman MA. Primary versus secondary distal femoral arthroplasty for treatment of total knee arthroplasty periprosthetic femur fractures. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28(7):1205-1209. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2013.02.030.
XXIII. Ponugoti N, Raghu A, Kosy JD, Magill H. A comparison of distal femoral replacement versus fixation in treating periprosthetic supracondylar femur fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023;143(3):1234-1243. doi:10.1007/s00402-022-04603-1.