The History of Classification Systems for Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures: A Literature Review

Abstract

Periprosthetic femoral fractures (PPFFs) following total hip arthroplasty (THA) present a significant clinical challenge due to their increasing incidence with an aging population and evolving surgical practices. Historically, classifications were primarily based on anatomical fracture location, the stability of the implant, and bone quality surrounding the implant. We critically analyzed 25 classification systems, highlighting the emergence and adaptations of key systems such as the Vancouver classification system (VCS) and the Unified classification system (UCS), which are lauded for their simplicity and effectiveness yet require further refinement. VCS, developed in 1995, categorizes fractures based on the site, implant stability, and bone quality, and remains widely used due to its robust applicability across different clinical settings. Introduced in 2014, UCS expands the VCS to encompass all periprosthetic fractures with additional fracture types, aiming for a universal application. Despite their widespread adoption, these systems exhibit shortcomings, including the incomplete inclusion of all PPFF types and the imprecise assessment of implant stability and surrounding bone loss. These gaps can result in misclassification and suboptimal treatment outcomes. This paper suggests the necessity for ongoing improvements in classification systems to include emerging fracture types and refined diagnostic criteria, ensuring that they remain relevant to contemporary orthopedic practices and continue to facilitate the precise tailoring of treatment to patient-specific circumstances. This comprehensive historical review serves as a foundation for future innovations in classification systems, ultimately aiming to standardize PPFF treatment and improve patient prognosis.

Keywords

Classification system / Hip arthroplasty / Periprosthetic femoral fracture / The Unified classification system / The Vancouver classification system

References

[1] Hamadouche M, Stern LL. Periprosthetic fractures and complicated arthroplasties. Int Orthop. 2015; 39(9): 1671–1672.

[2] Frenzel S, Vécsei V, Negrin L. Periprosthetic femoral fractures–incidence, classification problems and the proposal of a modified classification scheme. Int Orthop. 2015; 39(10): 1909–1920.

[3] Streit MR, Merle C, Clarius M, Aldinger PR. Late peri-prosthetic femoral fracture as a major mode of failure in uncemented primary hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011; 93(2): 178–183.

[4] Ehlinger M, Delaunay C, Karoubi M, Bonnomet F, Ramdane N, Hamadouche M, et al. Revision of primary total hip arthroplasty for peri-prosthetic fracture: a prospective epidemiological study of 249 consecutive cases in France. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2014; 100(6): 657–662.

[5] Duncan CP, Haddad FS. The unified classification system (UCS): improving our understanding of periprosthetic fractures. Bone Joint J. 2014; 96-B(6): 713–716.

[6] Malchau H, Herberts P, Eisler T, Garellick G, Söderman P. The Swedish total hip replacement register. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002; 84-A(Suppl 2): 2–20.

[7] Kinov P, Volpin G, Sevi R, Tanchev PP, Antonov B, Hakim G. Surgical treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures following hip arthroplasty: our institutional experience. Injury. 2015; 46(10): 1945–1950.

[8] Ricci WM. Periprosthetic femur fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2015; 29(3): 130–137.

[9] Katz JN, Wright EA, Polaris JJ, Harris MB, Losina E. Prevalence and risk factors for periprosthetic fracture in older recipients of total hip replacement: a cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014; 15: 168.

[10] Haddad FS. Periprosthetic femoral fractures: a window into some of the challenges we face. Bone Joint J. 2016; 98-B(4): 433–434.

[11] Tsutsui T, Goto T, Hamada D, Tonogai I, Mineta K, Abe M, et al. Successful outcomes using interlocking prostheses for periprosthetic fractures with loose femoral components. J Med Invest. 2016; 62(3–4): 242–244.

[12] Sheth NP, Brown NM, Moric M, Berger RA, Della Valle CJ. Operative treatment of early peri-prosthetic femur fractures following primary total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2013; 28(2): 286–291.

[13] Cook RE, Jenkins PJ, Walmsley PJ, Patton JT, Robinson CM. Risk factors for periprosthetic fractures of the hip: a survivorship analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008; 466(7): 1652–1656.

[14] Williams JA, Khawar H, Middleton R. Periprosthetic femoral fractures. Br J Hosp Med (Lond). 2024; 85(2): 1–9.

[15] Abdel MP, Lewallen DG, Berry DJ. Periprosthetic femur fractures treated with modular fluted, tapered stems. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014; 472(2): 599–603.

[16] Matharu GS, Pynsent PB, Dunlop DJ, Revell MP. Clinical outcome following surgical intervention for periprosthetic hip fractures at a tertiary referral centre. Hip Int. 2012; 22(5): 494–499.

[17] Ohly NE, Whitehouse MR, Duncan CP. Periprosthetic femoral fractures in total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int. 2014; 24(6): 556–567.

[18] Eingartner C, Volkmann R, Ochs U, Egetemeyr D, Weise K. Intramedullary stabilization of periprosthetic fractures of the femur taking special account of bone defects. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2007; 33(5): 560–572.

[19] Abdel MP, Houdek MT, Watts CD, Lewallen DG, Berry DJ. Epidemiology of periprosthetic femoral fractures in 5417 revision total hip arthroplasties: a 40-year experience. Bone Joint J. 2016; 98-B(4): 468–474.

[20] Brown JM, Mistry JB, Cherian JJ, Elmallah RK, Chughtai M, Harwin SF, et al. Femoral component revision of Total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2016; 39(6): e1129–e1139.

[21] Ogino D, Kawaji H, Konttinen L, Lehto M, Rantanen P, Malmivaara A, et al. Total hip replacement in patients eighty years of age and older. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008; 90(9): 1884–1890.

[22] Ricioli W Jr, Queiroz MC, Guimarães RP, Honda EK, Polesello G, Fucs PMMB. Prevalence and risk factors for intra-operative periprosthetic fractures in one thousand eight hundred and seventy two patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty: a cross-sectional study. Int Orthop. 2015; 39(10): 1939–1943.

[23] Müller F, Galler M, Zellner M, Bäuml C, Füchtmeier B. The fate of proximal femoral fractures in the 10th decade of life: an analysis of 117 consecutive patients. Injury. 2015; 46(10): 1983–1987.

[24] Zuurmond RG, van Wijhe W, van Raay JJ, Bulstra SK. High incidence of complications and poor clinical outcome in the operative treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures: an analysis of 71 cases. Injury. 2010; 41(6): 629–633.

[25] Brand S, Ettinger M, Omar M, Hawi N, Krettek C, Petri M. Concepts and potential future developments for treatment of periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures. Open Orthop J. 2015; 9: 405–411.

[26] Abdel MP, Cottino U, Mabry TM. Management of periprosthetic femoral fractures following total hip arthroplasty: a review. Int Orthop. 2015; 39(10): 2005–2010.

[27] Berry DJ. Epidemiology: hip and knee. Orthop Clin North Am. 1999; 30(2): 183–190.

[28] Abdel MP, Watts CD, Houdek MT, Lewallen DG, Berry DJ. Epidemiology of periprosthetic fracture of the femur in 32644 primary total hip arthroplasties–a 40-year experience. Bone Joint J. 2016; 98-B: 461–467.

[29] Lindahl H, Malchau H, Herberts P, Garellick G. Periprosthetic femoral fractures classification and demographics of 1049 periprosthetic femoral fractures from the Swedish National hip Arthroplasty Register. J Arthroplasty. 2005; 20(7): 857–865.

[30] Lindahl H. Epidemiology of periprosthetic femur fracture around a total hip arthroplasty. Injury. 2007; 38(6): 651–654.

[31] COMPOSE Study Team. Epidemiology and characteristics of femoral periprosthetic fractures: data from the characteristics, outcomes and management of periprosthetic fracture service evaluation (COMPOSE) cohort study. Bone Joint J. 2022; 104-B(8): 987–996.

[32] Zustin J, Winter E. Failed internal fixation due to osteonecrosis following traumatic periprosthetic fracture after hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Acta Orthop. 2009; 80(6): 666–669.

[33] McLean AL, Patton JT, Moran M. Femoral replacement for salvage of periprosthetic fracture around a total hip replacement. Injury. 2012; 43(7): 1166–1169.

[34] Young SW, Pandit S, Munro JT, Pitto RP. Periprosthetic femoral fractures after total hip arthroplasty. ANZ J Surg. 2007; 77(6): 424–428.

[35] Jakubowitz E, Seeger JB, Kretzer JP, Heisel C, Kleinhans JA, Thomsen M. The influence of age, bone quality and body mass index on periprosthetic femoral fractures: a biomechanical laboratory study. Med Sci Monit. 2009; 15(11): BR307–BR312.

[36] Matsuno Y, Takegami Y, Tokutake K, Takami H, Kurokawa H, Iwata M, et al. Incidence and risk factors for fracture-related infection after peri-prosthetic femoral fractures: a multicenter retrospective study (TRON group study). Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2023; 24(5): 433–439.

[37] Vanhegan IS, Malik AK, Jayakumar P, Ul Islam S, Haddad FS. A financial analysis of revision hip arthroplasty: the economic burden in relation to the national tariff. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012; 94(5): 619–623.

[38] Phillips JR, Boulton C, Moran CG, Manktelow ARJ. What is the financial cost of treating periprosthetic hip fractures? Injury. 2011; 42(2): 146–149.

[39] Toogood PA, Vail TP. Periprosthetic fractures: a common problem with a disproportionately high impact on healthcare resources. J Arthroplasty. 2015; 30(10): 1688–1691.

[40] Naqvi GA, Baig SA, Awan N. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability and validity of the Vancouver classification system of periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2012; 27(6): 1047–1050.

[41] Corten K, Vanrykel F, Bellemans J, Frederix PR, Simon JP, Broos PLO. An algorithm for the surgical treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the femur around a well-fixed femoral component. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009; 91(11): 1424–1430.

[42] Brady OH, Garbuz DS, Masri BA, Duncan CP. The reliability and validity of the Vancouver classification of femoral fractures after hip replacement. J Arthroplasty. 2000; 15(1): 59–62.

[43] Baba T, Homma Y, Momomura R, Kobayashi H, Matsumoto M, Futamura K, et al. New classification focusing on implant designs useful for setting therapeutic strategy for periprosthetic femoral fractures. Int Orthop. 2015; 39(1): 1–5.

[44] Drexler M, Dwyer T, Chakravertty R, Backstein D, Gross AE, Safir O. The outcome of modified extended trochanteric osteotomy in revision THA for Vancouver B2/B3 periprosthetic fractures of the femur. J Arthroplasty. 2014; 29(8): 1598–1604.

[45] Rayan F, Dodd M, Haddad FS. European validation of the Vancouver classification of periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008; 90(12): 1576–1579.

[46] Froberg L, Troelsen A, Brix M. Periprosthetic Vancouver type B1 and C1 fractures treated by locking-plate osteosynthesis. Acta Orthop. 2012; 83(6): 648–652.

[47] Valentini R, Martino M, de Fabrizio G, Fancellu G. Periprosthetic fractures of the femur: our experience. Acta Biomed. 2014; 85(1): 35–43.

[48] Amenabar T, Rahman WA, Avhad VV, Vera R, Gross AE, Kuzyk PR. Vancouver type B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures treated with revision total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2015; 39(10): 1927–1932.

[49] Hernandez-Vaquero D, Fernandez-Lombardia J, de los Rios JL, Perez-Coto I, Iglesias-Fernandez S. Treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures with modular stems. Int Orthop. 2015; 39(10): 1933–1938.

[50] Moloney GB, Westrick ER, Siska PA, Tarkin IS. Treatment of periprosthetic femur fractures around a well-fixed hip arthroplasty implant: span the whole bone. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2014; 134(1): 9–14.

[51] Streubel PN. Mortality after periprosthetic femur fractures. J Knee Surg. 2013; 26(1): 27–30.

[52] Bhattacharyya T, Chang D, Meigs JB, Estok DM 2nd, Malchau H. Mortality after periprosthetic fracture of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89(12): 2658–2662.

[53] Lindahl H, Oden A, Garellick G, Malchau H. The excess mortality due to periprosthetic femur fracture. A study from the Swedish national hip arthroplasty register. Bone. 2007; 40(5): 1294–1298.

[54] Meessen JM, Pisani S, Gambino ML, Bonarrigo D, van Schoor N, Fozzato S, et al. Assessment of mortality risk in elderly patients after proximal femoral fracture. Orthopedics. 2014; 37(2): e194–e200.

[55] Dorotka R, Schoechtner H, Buchinger W. The influence of immediate surgical treatment of proximal femoral fractures on mortality and quality of life. Operation within six hours of the fracture versus later than six hours. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003; 85(8): 1107–1113.

[56] PIPPAS Study Group. Optimizing periprosthetic fracture management and in-hospital outcome: insights from the PIPPAS multicentric study of 1387 cases in Spain. J Orthop Traumatol. 2024; 25(1): 13.

[57] Bozic KJ, Kamath AF, Ong K, Lau E, Kurtz S, Chan V, et al. Comparative epidemiology of revision arthroplasty: failed THA poses greater clinical and economic burdens than failed TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; 473(6): 2131–2138.

[58] Pires RE, de Toledo Lourenço PR, Labronici PJ, da Rocha LR, Balbachevsky D, Cavalcante FR, et al. Interprosthetic femoral fractures: proposed new classification system and treatment algorithm. Injury. 2014; 45(Suppl 5): S2–S6.

[59] Yasen AT, Haddad FS. Periprosthetic fractures: bespoke solutions. Bone Joint J. 2014; 96-B(11 Supple A): 48–55.

[60] Chomrikh L, Gebuhr P, Bierling R, Lind U, Zwart HJJ. Age-dependent fracture risk in hip revisions with radial impaction grafting technique: a 5-10 year medium-term follow-up study. J Arthroplasty. 2014; 29(2): 443–447.

[61] Learmonth ID. The management of periprosthetic fractures around the femoral stem. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004; 86(1): 13–19.

[62] Dzaja I, Lyons MC, McCalden RW, Naudie DDD, Howard JL. Revision hip arthroplasty using a modular revision hip system in cases of severe bone loss. J Arthroplasty. 2014; 29(8): 1594–1597.

[63] Haasper C, Enayatollahi MA, Gehrke T. Treatment of Vancouver type B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures. Int Orthop. 2015; 39(10): 1989–1993.

[64] Gaski GE, Scully SP. In brief: classifications in brief: Vancouver classification of postoperative periprosthetic femur fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469(5): 1507–1510.

[65] Parrish TF, Jones JR. Fracture of the femur following prosthetic arthroplasty of the hip. Report of nine cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1964; 46: 241–248.

[66] Whittaker RP, Sotos LN, Ralston EL. Fractures of the femur about femoral endoprostheses. J Trauma. 1974; 14(8): 675–694.

[67] Johansson JE, McBroom R, Barrington TW, Hunter GA. Fracture of the ipsilateral femur in patients wih total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1981; 63(9): 1435–1442.

[68] Bethea JS 3rd, DeAndrade JR, Fleming LL, Lindenbaum SD, Welch RB. Proximal femoral fractures following total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982; 170: 95–106.

[69] Cooke PH, Newman JH. Fractures of the femur in relation to cemented hip prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1988; 70(3): 386–389.

[70] Jensen JS, Barfod G, Hansen D, Larsen E, Linde F, Menck H, et al. Femoral shaft fracture after hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand. 1988; 59(1): 9–13.

[71] Roffman M, Mendes DG. Fracture of the femur after total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 1989; 12(8): 1067–1070.

[72] AAOS. Committee on the hip: classification and management of femoral defects in total hip replacement. Exhibit. 57th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Orthpedic Surgeons. New Orleans, LA; 1990. p. 8–13.

[73] Mont MA, Maar DC. Fractures of the ipsilateral femur after hip arthroplasty. A statistical analysis of outcome based on 487 patients. J Arthroplasty. 1994; 9(5): 511–519.

[74] Beals RK, Tower SS. Periprosthetic fractures of the femur. An analysis of 93 fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996; 327: 238–246.

[75] Duncan CP, Masri BA. Fractures of the femur after hip replacement. Instr Course Lect. 1995; 44: 293–304.

[76] Capello W, D’Antonio J, Naughton M. Periprosthetic fractures around a cementless hydroxyapatite-coated implant. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014; 472: 604–610.

[77] Van Houwelingen AP, Duncan CP. The pseudo a(LT) periprosthetic fracture: it’s really a B2. Orthopedics. 2011; 34(9): e479–e481.

[78] Huang JF, Shen JJ, Chen JJ, Zheng Y, du WX, Liu FC, et al. New fracture pattern focusing on implant fracture for periprosthetic femoral fractures. Int Orthop. 2015; 39(9): 1765–1769.

[79] Schwartz JT Jr, Mayer JG, Engh CA. Femoral fracture during non- cemented total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989; 71(8): 1135–1142.

[80] Marshall RA, Weaver MJ, Sodickson A, Khurana B. Periprosthetic femoral fractures in the emergency department: what the orthopedic surgeon wants to know. Radiographics. 2017; 37(4): 1202–1217.

[81] Kang PD, Li DH, Pei FX. The treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures after total hip arthroplasty (in Chinese). Chin J Orthop. 2019; 39(15): 961–972.

[82] Li ZC, Li RJ, Ke Y, Lin JH. Classification and treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip arthroplasty (in Chinese). Chin J Orthop. 2017; 37(15): 952–960.

[83] Laurer HL, Wutzler S, Possner S, Geiger EV, el Saman A, Marzi I, et al. Outcome after operative treatment of Vancouver type B1 and C periprosthetic femoral fractures: open reduction and internal fixation versus revision arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2011; 131(7): 983–989.

[84] Dargan D, Jenkinson MJ, Acton JD. A retrospective review of the Dall-miles plate for periprosthetic femoral fractures: twenty-seven cases and a review of the literature. Injury. 2014; 45(12): 1958–1963.

[85] Holder N, Papp S, Gofton W, Beaulé PE. Outcomes following surgical treatment of periprosthetic femur fractures: a single centre series. Can J Surg. 2014; 57(3): 209–213.

[86] Schwarzkopf R, Oni JK, Marwin SE. Total hip arthroplasty periprosthetic femoral fractures: a review of classification and current treatment. Bull Hosp Jt Dis. 2013; 71(1): 68–78.

[87] Han KJ, Lee J, Seo H. Isolated volar fracture-dislocation of the base of the second metacarpal bone by indirect injury. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2015; 6(1): 42–45.

[88] Lee S, Kagan R, Wang L, Doung YC. Reliability and validity of the Vancouver classification in periprosthetic fractures around cementless femoral stems. J Arthroplasty. 2019; 34(7S): S277–S281.

[89] Duncan CP. Periprosthetic fractures associated with joint replacement: our Tower of babel? Bone Joint J. 2014; 96-B(6): 711–712.

[90] COMPOSE Study Team. Management and outcomes of femoral periprosthetic fractures at the hip: data from the characteristics, outcomes and management of periprosthetic fracture service evaluation (COMPOSE) cohort study. Bone Joint J. 2022; 104-B(8): 997–1008.

[91] Capone A, Cavaliere P, Campacci A, Carulli C, Pignatti G, Randelli F, et al. Current practice of Italian Association of Revision Surgery Members in the treatment of unified classification system type B periprosthetic femoral fracture around hip arthroplasty: a cross-sectional survey. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil. 2022; 13: 21514593221080341.

[92] Scalici G, Boncinelli D, Zanna L, Buzzi R, Antonucci L, di Maida F, et al. Periprosthetic femoral fractures in Total hip arthroplasty (THA): a comparison between osteosynthesis and revision in a retrospective cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022; 23(1): 200.

[93] Thomas J, Shichman I, Ohanisian L, Stoops TK, Lawrence KW, Ashkenazi I, et al. Monoblock tapered stems in management of UCS B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures in revision total hip arthroplasty. Bone Jt Open. 2023; 4(8): 551–558.

[94] Jain S, Farook MZ, Aslam-Pervez N, Amer M, Martin DH, Unnithan A, et al. A multicentre comparative analysis of fixation versus revision surgery for periprosthetic femoral fractures following total hip arthroplasty with a cemented polished taper-slip femoral component. Bone Joint J. 2023; 105-B(2): 124–134.

[95] Platzer P, Schuster R, Luxl M, Widhalm HK, Eipeldauer S, Krusche-Mandl I, et al. Management and outcome of interprosthetic femoral fractures. Injury. 2011; 42(11): 1219–1225.

[96] Solarino G, Vicenti G, Moretti L, Abate A, Spinarelli A, Moretti B. Interprosthetic femoral fractures-a challenge of treatment. A systematic review of the literature. Injury. 2014; 45(2): 362–368.

[97] Woo SB, Choi ST, Chan WL. Atypical periprosthetic femoral fracture: a case report. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2016; 24(2): 269–272.

[98] Stauffer TP, Purcell KF, Pean C, DeBaun M, Bolognesi M, Ryan S, et al. Management of Intraoperative Acetabular Fractures during Total hip Arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 2024; 55(1): 9–17.

[99] Wood MJ, Al-Jabri T, Zaghloul A, Lanting B, Giannoudis PV, Hart AJ. Periprosthetic acetabular fractures as a complication of total hip arthroplasty. Injury. 2023; 54(11): 111058.

[100] Vioreanu MH, Parry MC, Haddad FS, Duncan CP. Field testing the unified classification system for peri-prosthetic fractures of the pelvis and femur around a total hip replacement: an international collaboration. Bone Joint J. 2014; 96-B(11): 1472–1477.

[101] Huang JF, Chen JJ, Shen JJ, Du WX, Liu FC, Tong PJ. The reliability and validity of the unified classification system of periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Belg. 2016; 82(2): 233–239.

[102] de Meo D, Zucchi B, Castagna V, Pieracci EM, Mangone M, Calistri A, et al. Validity and reliability of the unified classification system applied to periprosthetic femur fractures: a comparison with the Vancouver system. Curr Med Res Opin. 2020; 36(8): 1375–1381.

[103] Jain S, Mohrir G, Townsend O, Lamb JN, Palan J, Aderinto J, et al. Reliability and validity of the unified classification system for postoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures around cemented polished taper-slip stems. Bone Joint J. 2021; 103-B(8): 1339–1344.

[104] Schopper C, Luger M, Hipmair G, Schauer B, Gotterbarm T, Klasan A. The race for the classification of proximal periprosthetic femoral fractures: Vancouver vs unified classification system (UCS)—a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022; 23(1): 280.

[105] Mallory TH, Kraus TJ, Vaughn BK. Intraoperative femoral fractures associated with cementless total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 1989; 12(2): 231–239.

[106] Egrise F, Gastaud O, Cointat C, Raffaelli A, Tabutin J. Identification and treatment of potentially destabilizing Vancouver B-lesser trochanter periprosthetic fracture (“new B2”): a 33-case series. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2022; 108(6): 103357.

[107] Fan MQ, Chen XL, Huang Y, Huang JF. Open reduction and internal fixation with cables for the variant AGT periprosthetic fracture: a case report and literature review. Art Ther. 2020; 2(1): 10.

[108] Parvizi J, Vegari DN. Periprosthetic proximal femur fractures: current concepts. J Orthop Trauma. 2011; 25(Suppl 2): S77–S81.

[109] Haddad FS. Periprosthetic fractures: more challenges ahead. Bone Joint J. 2020; 102-B(5): 547–549.

[110] Grammatopoulos G, Pandit H, Kambouroglou G, Deakin M, Gundle R, McLardy-Smith P, et al. A unique peri-prosthetic fracture pattern in well fixed femoral stems with polished, tapered, collarless design of total hip replacement. Injury. 2011; 42(11): 1271–1276.

[111] Ninan TM, Costa ML, Krikler SJ. Classification of femoral periprosthetic fractures. Injury. 2007; 38(6): 661–668.

[112] Malhotra R, Gautam D, Gupta S. A new type of periprosthetic fracture: is it the time to update the unified classification system? Indian J Orthop. 2021; 55(5): 1277–1285.

[113] Baba T, Homma Y, Ochi H, Kobayashi H, Matsumoto M, Sakamoto Y, et al. Higher reliability and validity of Baba classification with computerised tomography imaging and implant information for periprosthetic femoral fractures. Int Orthop. 2015; 39(9): 1695–1699.

[114] Stoffel K, Horn T, Zagra L, Mueller M, Perka C, Eckardt H. Periprosthetic fractures of the proximal femur: beyond the Vancouver classification. EFORT Open Rev. 2020; 5(7): 449–456.

[115] Phillips J, Boulton C, Moran C, Manktelow A. Periprosthetic fractures around Exeter stems: a new injury? Bone Joint J. 2012; 94-B(Suppl. XXV): 187.

[116] Karam J, Campbell P, Desai S, Hunter M. Periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures in cemented and uncemented stems according to Vancouver classification: observation of a new fracture pattern. J Orthop Surg Res. 2020; 15(1): 100.

[117] Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC. “modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979; 141: 17–27.

[118] González-Martín D, Pais-Brito JL, González-Casamayor S, Guerra-Ferraz A, Ojeda-Jiménez J, Herrera-Pérez M. New sub-classification of Vancouver B2 periprosthetic hip fractures according to fracture pattern. Injury. 2022; 53(3): 1218–1224.

[119] Huang JF, Jiang XJ, Shen JJ, Zhong Y, Tong PJ, Fan XH. Modification of the unified classification system for periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci. 2018; 23(6): 982–986.

[120] Zhao WQ, Li XS, Fan MQ, Yao ZY, Song ZF, Tong PJ, et al. Surgical treatment of specific unified classification system B fractures: potentially destabilising lesser trochanter periprosthetic fractures. Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1): 14330.

[121] Fan MQ, Fan XH, Chen XL, Shen JJ, Jiang XJ, Li XS, et al. The reliability and validity of the modified unified classification system for periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci. 2021; 26(3): 385–388.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2024 The Author(s). Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.