3.8 Article

Periprosthetic stress fracture around a well-fixed type 2B short uncemented stem

Journal

SICOT-J
Volume 4, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/sicotj/2018031

Keywords

Total hip arthroplasty; Short stem; Thigh pain; Stress fracture; Periprosthetic fracture

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite the theoretical advantages of uncemented short stems, postoperative thigh pain is still matter of concern and can be attributed to different causes. We report a peculiar case of a stress fracture around a short cementless stem with cervico-metaphyseal fixation in an otherwise healthy patient. We implanted a MiniHip (TM) stem in a 43 year-old male professional golf player for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis using a ceramic on ceramic bearing. Against medical advice, the patient started to play soccer at the 4th postoperative month and was completely asymptomatic to that extent; but at 8 months follow-up and without a history of trauma he started complaining about progressive hip pain. After ruling out infection and loosening, histological analysis from a bone biopsy confirmed the diagnosis of stress fracture. Although revision surgery was initially scheduled, pain started to decrease gradually with protected weight-bearing (crutches) and disappeared around the first postoperative year, remaining the patient asymptomatic at 2 and half years of follow-up, with radiographs depicting a healed fracture with a hypertrophic callus. We encourage surgeons to be aware of the existence of periprosthetic stress fractures as a source of thigh pain (sometimes intractable), and despite being infrequent, they should always be contemplated, providing that these cases can be managed conservatively with rest and limited weight-bearing. After this uncommon case, we suggest to align the stem in order to equally distribute loads onto the medial calcar and the lateral femoral cortical.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available