Risk of periprosthetic femur fracture after anterior cortical bone windowing

Figures & data

Figure 1. Femur prepared for implantation.

Figure 2. The 3-point bending setup.

Figure 3. The Instron 5567 machine with femur load for 3-point bending.

Figure 4. Femur prepared for torsional testing. The top cup has been removed to show the cemented ends.

Table 1. Load to fracture ratio for the 3 implant tip positions

Test Groups (n)	Mean % (SD)	SE
–15 mm (13)	81 (14)	3.9
0 mm (7)	77 (12)	4.4
15 mm (7)	69 (17)	6.4

–15 mm vs. 15 mm, p = 0.1;

–15 mm vs. 0 mm, p = 0.6;

0 mm vs. 15 mm, p = 0.3.

Table 2 Bending stiffness ratio between femur pairs for the implant tip positions

Test Groups (n)	Mean % (SD)	SE
–15 mm (13)	92 (11)	2.9
0 mm (7)	87 (16)	6.0
15 mm (7)	112 (40)	15

15 mm vs. 15 mm, p = 0.1;

15 mm vs. 0 mm, p = 0.4;

0 mm vs. 15 mm, p = 0.1.