Factors Associated With Revision Surgery After Internal Fixation of Hip Fractures
SourceJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 32, 5, (2018), pp. 223-230
Article / Letter to editor
Display more detailsDisplay less details
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
SubjectRadboudumc 10: Reconstructive and regenerative medicine RIHS: Radboud Institute for Health Sciences; Radboudumc 10: Reconstructive and regenerative medicine RIMLS: Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences
BACKGROUND: Femoral neck fractures are associated with high rates of revision surgery after management with internal fixation. Using data from the Fixation using Alternative Implants for the Treatment of Hip fractures (FAITH) trial evaluating methods of internal fixation in patients with femoral neck fractures, we investigated associations between baseline and surgical factors and the need for revision surgery to promote healing, relieve pain, treat infection or improve function over 24 months postsurgery. Additionally, we investigated factors associated with (1) hardware removal and (2) implant exchange from cancellous screws (CS) or sliding hip screw (SHS) to total hip arthroplasty, hemiarthroplasty, or another internal fixation device. METHODS: We identified 15 potential factors a priori that may be associated with revision surgery, 7 with hardware removal, and 14 with implant exchange. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses in our investigation. RESULTS: Factors associated with increased risk of revision surgery included: female sex, [hazard ratio (HR) 1.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-2.50; P = 0.001], higher body mass index (for every 5-point increase) (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02-1.39; P = 0.027), displaced fracture (HR 2.16, 95% CI 1.44-3.23; P < 0.001), unacceptable quality of implant placement (HR 2.70, 95% CI 1.59-4.55; P < 0.001), and smokers treated with cancellous screws versus smokers treated with a sliding hip screw (HR 2.94, 95% CI 1.35-6.25; P = 0.006). Additionally, for every 10-year decrease in age, participants experienced an average increased risk of 39% for hardware removal. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study may inform future research by identifying high-risk patients who may be better treated with arthroplasty and may benefit from adjuncts to care (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.05-1.85; P = 0.020). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Upload full text
Use your RU credentials (u/z-number and password) to log in with SURFconext to upload a file for processing by the repository team.