Outcome and technical consideration of conversion total hip arthroplasty after failed fixation of intracapsular and extracapsular hip fractures: Are they really that different?

Abstract

Introduction: Conversion Total Hip Arthroplasty (cTHA) is a rescue strategy for proximal femur osteosynthesis failures. However, it is unclear whether cTHAs performed for extra-capsular fracture fixation failures (ECF) or for intra-capsular fracture fixation failures (ICF) share the same complexity and efficacy. The purpose of our study was to compare cTHAs performed on pre-existing ICFs and pre-existing ECFs, focusing on surgical complications and functional outcomes in both groups.

Methods: An observational retrospective study was conducted on cTHA patients, treated between 2014 and 2018, divided into 2 groups: ICF-group and ECF-group. The main outcomes were: type of implant used, duration of surgery, need for transfusions, incidence of complications, functional outcomes.

Results: 28 patients were included (15 in the ECF group and 13 in the ICF group); the average follow-up was of 31 ± 17.3 months. No significant differences were identified in terms of the type of implant used and duration of surgery. The number of transfused patients was 4 in the ICF group and 12 in the ECF group (p = 0.02); the average transfused units were 0.4 ± 0.7 in the ICF group and 1.3 ± 0.9 in the ECF group (p = 0.01). The incidence of complications - an infection and a dislocation, both of which occurred in the ICF group - and functional outcomes did not present significant differences.

Conclusion: The conversion surgery on ECFs patients is technically more difficult for the surgeon and prone to greater blood loss. The outcomes are satisfactory and overlap between the two groups.

Keywords: Complication; Conversion total hip arthroplasty; Failure; Hip fracture; Hip replacement; ORIF.