Locking condylar plate: best device to treat supracondylar fractures of the femur
Keywords:Supracondylar fracture of femur, Fixation, Locking plate, Range of motion
Background: Supracondylar fractures of the femur in adults account for only 7% of all femoral fractures. However, these fractures present with numerous complications. The purpose of this study was to assess the outcome of locking condylar plate in supracondylar fractures of femur in adults.
Methods: This study was based on 25 patients of supracondylar fracture of the femur treated with locking condylar plate at Srinivas Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Mukka, Suratkal, Mangalore. The patients were followed up for 1 year.
Results: In present study, 84% fractures were sustained due to road traffic accidents. In 23 (92%) patients, full weight bearing was achieved at 20 weeks while only 2 (8%) patients required more than 20 weeks. 80% of cases required less than 16 weeks for union while 20% required more than 16 weeks. Average injury to surgery time was 3.62 days in the present series. Superficial stitch infection occurred in two cases. Deep infection occurred in a grade 2 compound fracture in a male who was treated initially with debridement and antibiotics.
Conclusions: Good results are seen by distal femur locking condylar plate alone. It is the main implant of choice for distal femur fractures of all varieties. Best outcome is expected if fracture fixation is done following all the basic principles of fracture fixation. Advantage of the mechanical properties of a locking plate is definitely useful.
Schatzker J. Fractures of distal femur revisited. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;347:43-56.
Donald AW. Supracondylar and intercondylar fractures of the femur. Rockwood CA Jr, Green D, editors. 4th ed. Philadelphia: JB Lippincot, Mosby; 1996: 1973-1995.
Brett D, Crist BD, Gregorg J, Rocea P. Treatment of acute distal femur fractures. Orthopedics. 2008;31(7):681.
Giles JB, Delee JC, Heekman JD. Supracondylar -intercondylar fractures of the femur -treated with a supracondylar plate and lag-screw. JBJS. 1982;64:868.
Schatzker J, Lambert DC. Supracondylar fractures of femur. Clin Orthop. 1979;138:77-83.
Çalbıyık M, Ipek D. Use of Volar Locking Plate Versus Intramedullary Nailing for Fixation of Distal Radius Fractures: A Retrospective Analysis of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes. Med Sci Monit. 2018 Jan 30;24:602-13.
Gwathmey FW Jr, Jones-Quaidoo SM, Kahler D, Hurwitz S, Cui Q. Distal femoral fractures: current concepts. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010;18:597–607.
Nasr AM, Mc Leod I, Sabboubeh A, Maffulli N. Conservative or surgical management of distal femoral fractures. A retrospective study with a minimum five year follow-up. Acta Orthop Belg. 2000;66:477–83.
Gautier E, Sommer C. Guidelines for the clinical application of the LCP. Injury. 2003;34(2):63–76.
Greiwe RM, Archdeacon MT. Locking plate technology: current concepts. J Knee Surg. 2007;20:50–5.
Malik I, Khan R, khurana R, Sharma S. Comparative study of management of distal femoral fractures managed by dynamic condylar screw and distal femoral locking compression plate. Webmed Central Orthopaedics. 2015;6(9):WMC004976.
Gururaj NG, Vinaya G, Ahmad R, Comparative study between Dynamic Condylar Screw and Locking Plate Fixation in fractures of distal femur in adults – A study of 30 cases. Indian J Orthop Surg. 2016;2(2):147-50.
Vallier, Heather, Hennessey, Theresa, Sontich K, John et al. Failure of LCP Condylar Plate Fixation in the Distal Part of the Femur: A Report of Six Cases. J bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:846-53.
Rekha YB, Reddy NB. A prospective study of treatment of distal femur fractures with locking condylar plate. Int J Res Orthop. 2017;3(6):1117-21.
Girisha BA, Machani S, Shah R, Muralidhar N. Outcome of distal femoral fractures treated with locking compression plates. Int J Res Orthop. 2017;3:676-80.
Virk JS, Garg SK, Gupta P, Jangira V. Distal Femur Locking Plate: The Answer to All Distal Femoral Fractures. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(10):1–5.