Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jul;33(5):2081-2089.
doi: 10.1007/s00590-022-03398-6. Epub 2022 Oct 6.

Early peri-implant fractures after distal femur fracture locked plating?

Anna P Meyer  1 , Thomas M Large  2   3
Affiliations

Early peri-implant fractures after distal femur fracture locked plating?

Anna P Meyer et al. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2023 Jul.

Abstract

Purpose: To report the peri-implant fracture rates after locked plating of distal femur fractures and examine risk factors.

Methods: Over a 7 year period, 89 AO/OTA 33A/C distal femur fractures were identified and reviewed. After excluding treatment with intramedullary nails, age under 50, those with the proximal femur protected, or those without 6 months of follow-up, 42 distal femur fractures in 41 patients, mean age 72.3 were studied. All were treated with lateral locked plating of distal femur fractures. The details of the constructs were recorded. Mean follow-up was 562 days (18.7 months).

Results: 3/42 were open injuries, 9/42 were type C, 16/42 were type A, and 17 were periprosthetic above a knee arthroplasty. Two patients were treated with a dynamic plating construct using all far-cortical locking (FCL) screws in the diaphysis. 40 patients were treated with a variety of non-dynamic diaphyseal constructs including locking, non-locking, and four with 1-2 FCL screws distally. There was one asymptomatic nonunion. 2/2 patients in the dynamically plated group experienced a peri-implant fracture versus 1/40 in the non-dynamically plated group (p = 0.001). 3/9 with an all-locked construct versus 0/25 patients with a most proximal non-locking screw experienced a fracture.

Conclusions: The overall peri-implant fracture risk was 7.1% (3/42), 3/17 patients with a locking screw most proximal experienced a peri-implant fracture, 3/9 with an all-locking construct, and 2/2 patients with a dynamic construct experienced a fracture. These findings merit additional clinical and biomechanical study.

Keywords: Distal femur fracture; Fracture; Locked plate; Osteosynthesis; Peri-implant fracture; Periprosthetic fracture; Plating.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Riedel MD, Oppizzi G, O’Hara NN et al (2020) Biomechanical comparison of distal femoral fracture fixation: analysis of non-locked, locked, and far-cortical locked constructs. J Orthop Res 38(12):2573–2579 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Doornink J, Fitzpatrick DC, Madley SM, Bottlang M (2011) Far cortical locking enables flexible fixation with periarticular locking plates. J Orthop Trauma 25(Suppl 1):S29-34 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
    1. Bottlang M, Tsai S, Bliven EK et al (2016) Dynamic stabilization with active locking plates delivers faster, stronger, and more symmetric fracture-healing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 98(6):466–474 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
    1. Harvin WH, Oladeji LO, Della Rocca GJ et al (2017) Working length and proximal screw constructs in plate osteosynthesis of distal femur fractures. Injury 48(11):2597–2601 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Henschel J, Tsai S, Fitzpatrick DC, Marsh JL, Madey SM, Bottlang M (2017) Comparison of 4 methods of dynamization of locking plates: differences in the amount and type of fracture motion. J Orthop Trauma 31(10):531–537 - DOI - PubMed - PMC

LinkOut - more resources