Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fixation of supracondylar femoral fractures following total knee arthroplasty: is there any difference comparing angular stable plate fixation versus rigid interlocking nail fixation?

  • Trauma Surgery
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Literature does not provide any reliable comparison between angular stable plate fixation and rigid nail fixation for stabilization of supracondylar periprosthetic femoral fractures. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare these two implants in clinical practice relating to fracture healing, functional results and treatment-related complications.

Patients and methods

In this retrospective study (level IV), clinical and radiographic records of 86 patients (62 female and 24 male, average age: 75.6) with supracondylar periprosthetic femoral fractures between 1996 and 2010 were analyzed. 48 patients underwent lateral plate fixation by an angular stable plate system (LISS), whereas 38 patients were stabilized by a rigid interlocking nail device.

Results

Sixty-four (76 %) patients returned to their pre-injury activity level and were satisfied with their clinical outcome. We had an overall Oxford outcome score of 2.21, with patients following angular stable plate fixation of 2.22, and patients after rigid nail fixation of 2.20. Successful fracture healing within 6 months was achieved in 74 (88 %) patients. Comparing between plate fixation and nail fixation, statistical analysis did not reveal any significant differences.

Summary

Overall, we had a relatively high rate of fracture healing and a satisfactory functional outcome with both implants. Both methods of fixation showed similar results relating to the functional outcome and individual satisfaction of the patients. However, with regards to fracture healing and treatment-related complications, intramedullary nail fixation showed slight advantages.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kim KI, Egol KA, Hozack WJ et al (2006) Periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 446:167–175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Su ET, Hargovind D, Di Cesare P (2004) Periprosthetic femoral fractures above total knee replacements. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 12:12–20

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Felix NA, Stuart MJ, Hanssen AD (1997) Periprosthetic fractures of the tibia associated with total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 345:113–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Healy WL, Siliski JM, Incavo SJ (1993) Operative treatment of distal femoral fractures proximal to total knee replacements. J Bone Jt Surg Am 75:27–34

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Inglis AE, Walker PS (1991) Revision of failed knee replacements using fixed-axis hinges. J Bone Jt Surg Br 73:757–761

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ritter MA, Faris PM, Keating EM (1988) Anterior femoral notching and ipsilateral supracondylar femur fractures in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 3:185–187

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kolb K, Koller H, Lorenz I, Holz U, Marx F, Grützner P, Kolb W (2009) Operative treatment of distal femoral fractures above total knee arthroplasty with the indirect reduction technique. A long-term follow-up study. Injury 40:433–439

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Koval KJ, Hoehl JJ, Kummer FJ et al (1997) Distal femoral fixation: a biomechanical comparison of the standard condylar buttress plate, a locked buttress plate, and the 95-degree blade plate. J Orthop Trauma 11:521–524

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. McLaren AC, Dupont JA, Schroeber DC (1994) Open reduction internal fixation of supracondylar fractures above total knee arthroplasties using the intramedullary supracondylar rod. Clin Orthop Relat Res 302:194–198

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Murrel GA, Nunley JA (1995) Interlocked supracondylar intramedullary nails for supracondylar fractures after total knee arthroplasty. A new treatment method. J Arthroplasty 10:37–42

    Google Scholar 

  11. O’Tool RV, Gobezie R, Hwang R et al (2006) Low complication rate of LISS for femur fractures adjacent to stable hip or knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Rel Res 450:203–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Althausen PL, Lee MA, Finkemeier CG et al (2003) Operative stabilization of supracondylar femur fractures above a total knee arthroplasty. A comparison of four treatment methods. J Arthroplasty 38:834–839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chakravarthy J, Bansal R, Cooper J (2007) Locking plate osteosynthesis for Vancouver type B1 and type C periprosthetic fractures of the femur: a report on 12 patients. Injury 38:725–733

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fulkerson E, Koval K, Preston CF et al (2006) Fixation of periprosthetic femoral shaft fractures associated with cemented femoral stems: a biomechanical comparison of locked plating and conventional cable plates. J Orthop Trauma 20:89–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Perren SM (2002) Evolution of the internal fixation of long bone fractures. The scientific basis of biological internal fixation: choosing a new balance between stability and biology. J Bone Jt Surg Br 84:1093–1110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Sah AP, Marshall A, Virkus WV et al (2010) Interprosthetic fractures of the femur. J Arthroplasty 25:280–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria

    Silke Aldrian, Rupert Schuster, Nicole Haas, Jochen Erhart, Markus Strickner, Beate Blutsch, Simon Wernhart, Johannes Leitgeb & Patrick Platzer

Authors
  1. Silke Aldrian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rupert Schuster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nicole Haas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jochen Erhart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Markus Strickner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Beate Blutsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Simon Wernhart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Johannes Leitgeb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Patrick Platzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Platzer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aldrian, S., Schuster, R., Haas, N. et al. Fixation of supracondylar femoral fractures following total knee arthroplasty: is there any difference comparing angular stable plate fixation versus rigid interlocking nail fixation?. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 133, 921–927 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-013-1730-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-013-1730-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation