Outcomes After Distal Femur Replacement for Fracture: A Multi-Institutional Retrospective Review.

Journal and index pages often block iframe embedding. This reader keeps the evidence details in Orthonotes and leaves the source page one click away.

Abstract

[Indexed for MEDLINE] Conflict of interest statement: D. C. Landy is on the editorial or governing board for American Journal of Sports Medicine and is a paid presenter or speaker for Smith & Nephew. S. T. Duncan is a paid consultant for Bone Support, Heron, Heraeus, OrthAlign, Smith & Nephew, and Zimmer; receives research support from Bone Support, Medtronic, Smith & Nephew, and Zimmer; is on the editorial or governing board for Journal of Arthroplasty, Journal of Knee Surgery, Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; is a board or committee member for Kentcuky Orthopaedic Society; has stock or stock options in MiCare and Rom3; and receives IP royalties from Smith & Nephew. M. T. Archdeacon reports other professional activities from Stryker. W. T. Obremskey reports other professional activities from Orthopedic Trauma Association. J. M. Lawrenz is a board or committee member for Musculoskeletal Tumor Society. C. Lee is a paid presenter or speaker for DePuy, Johnson & Johnson Company; reports IP royalties from Globus Medical; is a paid consultant for Globus Medical, Smith & Nephew, Stryker, and Synthes; and is on the board or committee member for Orthopaedic Trauma Association. A. Aneja reports honoraria from the Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Osteosynthesefragen Foundation and research support from the Orthopaedic Trauma Association, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society, and United States Department of Defense. A. Aneja is a board or committee member for American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and Orthopaedic Trauma Association. The remaining authors report no conflict of interest. 14. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2024 Nov;110(7):103856. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2024.103856. Epub 2024 Mar 2. Revision total knee arthroplasty with periprosthetic distal femoral fracture. Chantelot C(1), Saab M(2), Martin T(2), Begue T(3), Ehlinger M(4), Flecher X(5); SoFCOT(6). Author information: (1)Service de traumatologie, hôpital Salengro, CHU de Lille, avenue du Professeur Emile-Laine, 59000 Lille, France. Electronic address: christophe.chantelot@chru-lille.fr. (2)Service de traumatologie, hôpital Salengro, CHU de Lille, avenue du Professeur Emile-Laine, 59000 Lille, France. (3)Service de traumatologie, hôpital Antoine-Béclère, 157, rue de la Porte de Trivaux, 92140 Clamart, France. (4)Service de traumatologie, hôpital de Hautepierre, avenue Molière, 67200 Strasbourg, France. (5)Service de traumatologie, hôpital Nord, chemin des Bourrely, 13015 Marseille, France. (6)56, rue Boissonade, 75014 Paris cedex, France. Treatment strategies for periprosthetic distal femoral fracture depend on the type of fracture, level with respect to the prosthesis, and prosthesis fixation. The usual treatment is internal fixation by nail or locking plate. This can be more difficult when the fracture is close to the joint, is destabilizing the prosthesis or is associated with reduced bone stock, and implant exchange should be considered, depending on the patient's health status. The aim is to obtain the fastest possible recovery while limiting complications and minimizing surgery time for often frail and elderly patients. The present study details the implant revision technique in periprosthetic distal femoral fracture, which requires experience in traumatology and prosthetic revision and material adapted to the situation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V, expert opinion. Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved. DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2024.103856