Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Orthopaedics
Published in: International Orthopaedics 8/2016

01-08-2016 | Original Paper

Locked plate versus retrograde intramedullary nail for periprosthetic femur fractures above total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis

Authors: Bo Li, Peng Gao, Guixing Qiu, Tao Li

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 8/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Locked plate (LP) and retrograde intramedullary nail (RIN) are the most commonly used treatment options for periprosthetic femur fracture above total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Controversy still exists regarding which is better. Therefore we performed a meta-analysis to compare their clinical results.

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted through PubMed, EMBase and the Cochrane Collaboration Library. Six comparative studies (265 patients) were included for the meta-analysis.

Results

No statistically significant differences were found between the LP group and RIN group in terms of six month union rate (OR, 1.19; 95 % CI, 0.52–2.69; P = 0.68), union time (WMD, 0.22; 95 % CI, −0.41 to 0.84; P = 0.50), operation time (WMD, 0.54; 95 % CI, −13.09 to 14.17; P = 0.94) or complication rate (OR, 0.79; 95 % CI, 0.22–2.91; P = 0.73). The LP fixation may have a relatively higher re-operation rate (OR, 5.17; 95 % CI, 1.02–26.27; P = 0.05) compared with RIN. The mean union time was 4.0 months in the LP group and 3.7 months in the RIN group.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis found no statistically significant difference in six month union rate, union time, operation time and complication rate between the LP group and RIN group. The RIN fixation may have a potential of lower re-operation rate compared with LP. The mean union time was 4.0 months in the LP group and 3.7 months in the RIN group.
Literature
1.
Dennis DA (2001) Periprosthetic fractures following total knee arthroplasty. Instr Course Lect 50:379PubMed
2.
Bezwada HP, Neubauer P, Baker J, Israelite CL, Johanson NA (2004) Periprosthetic supracondylar femur fractures following total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 19(4):453CrossRef
3.
Rorabeck CH, Taylor JW (1999) Periprosthetic fractures of the femur complicating total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 30(2):265CrossRefPubMed
4.
Sisto DJ, Lachiewicz PF, Insall JN (1985) Treatment of supracondylar fractures following prosthetic arthroplasty of the knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res (196):265
5.
Herrera DA, Kregor PJ, Cole PA, Levy BA, Jonsson A, Zlowodzki M (2008) Treatment of acute distal femur fractures above a total knee arthroplasty: systematic review of 415 cases (1981–2006). Acta Orthop 79(1):22CrossRefPubMed
6.
Merkel KD, Johnson EW Jr (1986) Supracondylar fracture of the femur after total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 68(1):29PubMed
7.
Moran MC, Brick GW, Sledge CB, Dysart SH, Chien EP (1996) Supracondylar femoral fracture following total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 324:196CrossRefPubMed
8.
Althausen PL, Lee MA, Finkemeier CG, Meehan JP, Rodrigo JJ (2003) Operative stabilization of supracondylar femur fractures above total knee arthroplasty: a comparison of four treatment methods. J Arthroplast 18(7):834CrossRef
9.
Meneghini RM, Keyes BJ, Reddy KK, Maar DC (2014) Modern retrograde intramedullary nails versus periarticular locked plates for supracondylar femur fractures after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 29(7):1478CrossRef
10.
Kancherla VK, Nwachuku CO (2014) The treatment of periprosthetic femur fractures after total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 45(4):457CrossRefPubMed
11.
Platzer P, Schuster R, Aldrian S, Prosquill S, Krumboeck A, Zehetgruber I, Kovar F, Schwameis K, Vecsei V (2010) Management and outcome of periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasty. J Trauma 68(6):1464CrossRefPubMed
12.
Bong MR, Egol KA, Koval KJ, Kummer FJ, Su ET, Iesaka K, Bayer J, Di Cesare PE (2002) Comparison of the LISS and a retrograde-inserted supracondylar intramedullary nail for fixation of a periprosthetic distal femur fracture proximal to a total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 17(7):876CrossRef
13.
Makinen TJ, Dhotar HS, Fichman SG, Gunton MJ, Woodside M, Safir O, Backstein D, Willett TL, Kuzyk PR (2015) Periprosthetic supracondylar femoral fractures following knee arthroplasty: a biomechanical comparison of four methods of fixation. Int Orthop
14.
Kilucoglu OI, Akgul T, Saglam Y, Yazicioglu O (2013) Comparison of locked plating and intramedullary nailing for periprosthetic supracondylar femur fractures after knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Belg 79(4):417PubMed
15.
Aldrian S, Schuster R, Haas N, Erhart J, Strickner M, Blutsch B, Wernhart S, Leitgeb J, Platzer P (2013) 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(7):921CrossRefPubMed
16.
Horneff JG 3rd, Scolaro JA, Jafari SM, Mirza A, Parvizi J, Mehta S (2013) Intramedullary nailing versus locked plate for treating supracondylar periprosthetic femur fractures. Orthopedics 36(5), e561CrossRefPubMed
17.
Hou Z, Bowen TR, Irgit K, Strohecker K, Matzko ME, Widmaier J, Smith WR (2012) Locked plating of periprosthetic femur fractures above total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Trauma 26(7):427CrossRefPubMed
18.
Large TM, Kellam JF, Bosse MJ, Sims SH, Althausen P, Masonis JL (2008) Locked plating of supracondylar periprosthetic femur fractures. J Arthroplast 23(6 Suppl 1):115CrossRef
19.
Wick M, Muller EJ, Kutscha-Lissberg F, Hopf F, Muhr G (2004) Periprosthetic supracondylar femoral fractures: LISS or retrograde intramedullary nailing? Problems with the use of minimally invasive technique. Unfallchirurg 107(3):181CrossRefPubMed
20.
Su ET, DeWal H, Di Cesare PE (2004) Periprosthetic femoral fractures above total knee replacements. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 12(1):12CrossRefPubMed
21.
Streubel PN, Ricci WM, Wong A, Gardner MJ (2011) Mortality after distal femur fractures in elderly patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(4):1188CrossRefPubMed
22.
Bhattacharyya T, Chang D, Meigs JB, Estok DM 2nd, Malchau H (2007) Mortality after periprosthetic fracture of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(12):2658CrossRefPubMed
23.
Kolb W, Guhlmann H, Windisch C, Marx F, Koller H, Kolb K (2010) Fixation of periprosthetic femur fractures above total knee arthroplasty with the less invasive stabilization system: a midterm follow-up study. J Trauma 69(3):670CrossRefPubMed
24.
Nauth A, Ristevski B, Begue T, Schemitsch EH (2011) Periprosthetic distal femur fractures: current concepts. J Orthop Trauma 25(Suppl 2):S82CrossRefPubMed
25.
Chettiar K, Jackson MP, Brewin J, Dass D, Butler-Manuel PA (2009) Supracondylar periprosthetic femoral fractures following total knee arthroplasty: treatment with a retrograde intramedullary nail. Int Orthop 33(4):981CrossRefPubMed
26.
Han HS, Oh KW, Kang SB (2009) Retrograde intramedullary nailing for periprosthetic supracondylar fractures of the femur after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg 1(4):201CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Rorabeck CH, Angliss RD, Lewis PL (1998) Fractures of the femur, tibia, and patella after total knee arthroplasty: decision making and principles of management. Instr Course Lect 47:449PubMed
28.
Rorabeck CH, Taylor JW (1999) Classification of periprosthetic fractures complicating total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 30(2):209CrossRefPubMed
29.
Neer CS 2nd, Grantham SA, Shelton ML (1967) Supracondylar fracture of the adult femur. A study of one hundred and ten cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 49(4):591PubMed
30.
Marsh JL, Slongo TF, Agel J, Broderick JS, Creevey W, DeCoster TA, Prokuski L, Sirkin MS, Ziran B, Henley B, Audige L (2007) Fracture and dislocation classification compendium—2007: orthopaedic trauma association classification, database and outcomes committee. J Orthop Trauma 21(10 Suppl):S1CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Locked plate versus retrograde intramedullary nail for periprosthetic femur fractures above total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis
Authors
Bo Li
Peng Gao
Guixing Qiu
Tao Li
Publication date
01-08-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
International Orthopaedics / Issue 8/2016
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2962-9

Other articles of this Issue 8/2016

International Orthopaedics 8/2016 Go to the issue

Original Paper

Latarjet procedure: is the coracoid enough to restore the glenoid surface?

Orthopaedic Heritage

Plaster of Paris: the orthopaedic surgeon heritage

Original Paper

A multi-center analysis of adverse events among two thousand, three hundred and seventy two adult patients undergoing adult autologous stem cell therapy for orthopaedic conditions

Original Paper

Acetabular reconstruction with a reinforcement device and bone grafting in revision arthroplasty—a mean five years of follow-up

Original Paper

Anterior minimally invasive subcapital osteotomy without hip dislocation for slipped capital femoral epiphysis

Original Paper

Can the gracilis replace the anterior cruciate ligament in the knee? A biomechanical study