• P M Prodinger, N Harrasser, C Suren, F Pohlig, H Mühlhofer, J Schauwecker, and R von Eisenhart-Rothe.
• Klinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
• Unfallchirurg. 2016 Apr 1; 119 (4): 295-306.

AbstractPeriprosthetic fractures of hip and knee prostheses are gaining clinical significance due to the increasing numbers of of primary arthroplasties. Additionally, these fractures are often associated with poor bone quality or present in patients after multiple revision procedures and concomitant excessive bone defects precluding those patients to be adequately treated by conventional osteosynthesis. Revision implants provide a wide range of options for the treatment of these fractures in order to achieve good clinical results. In the acetabular region cavitary defects associated with periprosthetic fractures can be treated by the use of megacups. Extensive segmental defects and pelvic discontinuity necessitate the use of cups with additional iliac support or even customized implants. Proximal femoral fractures can usually be fixed with modular stems and diaphyseal anchorage. Periprosthetic knee joint fractures can be treated with revision implants with modular sleeves or augment-combinations allowing sufficient bridging of bony defects. Functional reconstruction or refixation of the extensor mechanism is of crucial importance.

24 keywords...

hide…