Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 3/2024

29-12-2023 | Hip-TEP | Orthopaedic Surgery

Are periprosthetic hip fractures more severe than native hip fractures? A systematic review of outcomes and resource utilization

Authors: Mitchell L. Thom, Robert J. Burkhart, Ramón A. Arza, Marsalis C. Brown, Glenn D. Wera

Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery | Issue 3/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is a paucity of data comparing periprosthetic hip fracture (PPHFx) outcomes and resource utilization to native fractures. Many surgeons consider periprosthetic hip fractures to be more severe injuries than native fractures. The aim of this systematic review is to characterize the outcomes of PPHFx and assess their severity relative to native hip fractures (NHFx).

Methods

A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis systematic review was conducted using Medline, Biosis, and Cinahl. Primary outcomes were time to surgery, length of stay (LOS), cost of management, disposition, complication rates, readmission rates, and mortality.

Results

14 articles (13,489 patients) from 2010 to 2018 were included in the study. Study quality was generally low. Patient follow-up ranged from 1 month to 3.2 years. LOS ranged from 5.2 to 38 days. US cost of management was best estimated at $53,669 ± 19,817. Discharge to skilled nursing facilities ranged from 64.5 to 74.5%. Time to surgery ranged from 1.9 to 5.7 days. Readmission rates ranged from 12 to 32%. Per Clavien–Dindo classification, 33.9% suffered minor complications; 14.3% suffered major complications. 1 month and 1 year mortality ranged from 2.9% to 10% and 9.7% to 45%, respectively.

Conclusion

Time to surgery and LOS were longer for PPHFx relative to NHFx. Complications’ rates were higher for PPHFx compared to NHFx. There is no evidence for differences in LOS, cost, discharge, readmission rates, or mortality between PPHFx and NHFx. These results may serve as a baseline in future evaluation of PPHFx management.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Varnum C (2017) Outcomes of different bearings in total hip arthroplasty - implant survival, revision causes, and patient-reported outcome. Dan Med J 64:B5350PubMed Varnum C (2017) Outcomes of different bearings in total hip arthroplasty - implant survival, revision causes, and patient-reported outcome. Dan Med J 64:B5350PubMed
3.
go back to reference Ben-Shlomo Y, Blom A, Boulton C et al (2022) The National Joint Registry 19th Annual Report 2022. National Joint Registry, London Ben-Shlomo Y, Blom A, Boulton C et al (2022) The National Joint Registry 19th Annual Report 2022. National Joint Registry, London
4.
go back to reference W-Dahl A, Kärrholm J, Rogmark C, et al (2022) Annual report 2022 Swedish arthroplasty register. Swedish arthroplasty register W-Dahl A, Kärrholm J, Rogmark C, et al (2022) Annual report 2022 Swedish arthroplasty register. Swedish arthroplasty register
38.
go back to reference Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E et al (2007) Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. JBJS 89:780CrossRef Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E et al (2007) Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. JBJS 89:780CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Are periprosthetic hip fractures more severe than native hip fractures? A systematic review of outcomes and resource utilization
Authors
Mitchell L. Thom
Robert J. Burkhart
Ramón A. Arza
Marsalis C. Brown
Glenn D. Wera
Publication date
29-12-2023
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords
Hip-TEP
Hip-TEP
Published in
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery / Issue 3/2024
Print ISSN: 0936-8051
Electronic ISSN: 1434-3916
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-023-05116-1

Other articles of this Issue 3/2024

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 3/2024 Go to the issue