Validity and reliability of the Unified Classification System applied to periprosthetic femur fractures: a comparison with the Vancouver system

References

• Torre M, Laricchiuta P, Luzi I, et al. Italian Arthroplasty Registry Project. Better data quality for better patient safety. Fourth Report 2017 – Addendum. Roma: Il Pensiero Scientifico Editore, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Culliford D, Maskell J, Judge A, et al. Future projections of total hip and knee arthroplasty in the UK: results from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2015;23(4):594–600.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hooper G, Lee AJ, Rothwell A, et al. Current trends and projections in the utilisation rates of hip and knee replacement in New Zealand from 2001 to 2026. N Z Med J. 2014;127(1401):82–93.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, et al. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(4):780–785.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel A, Pavlou G, Mújica-Mota RE, et al. The epidemiology of revision total knee and hip arthroplasty in England and Wales: a comparative analysis with projections for the United States. A study using the National Joint Registry dataset. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B(8):1076–1081.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pivec R, Issa K, Kapadia BH, et al. Incidence and future projections of periprosthetic femoral fracture following primary total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of international registry data. J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2015;25(4):269–275.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lindahl H, Malchau H, Herberts P, et al. 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdel MP, Houdek MT, Watts CD, et al. Epidemiology of periprosthetic femoral fractures in 5417 revision total hip arthroplasties: a 40-year experience. Bone Joint J. 2016;98-B(4):468–474.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarzkopf R, Oni JK, Marwin SE. Total hip arthroplasty periprosthetic femoral fractures: a review of classification and current treatment. Bull Hosp Jt Dis (2013)). 2013;71(1):68–78.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Froberg L, Troelsen A, Brix M. Periprosthetic Vancouver type B1 and C fractures treated by locking-plate osteosynthesis: fracture union and reoperations in 60 consecutive fractures. Acta Orthop. 2012;83(6):648–652.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindahl H, Garellick G, Regnér H, et al. Three hundred and twenty-one periprosthetic femoral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(6):1215–1222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duncan CP, Masri BA. Fractures of the femur after hip replacement. Instr Course Lect. 1995;44:293–304.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• The Unified Classification System (UCS): improving our understanding of periprosthetic fractures. Bone Joint J. 2014;96(B):713–716.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landis JR, Koch GC. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometics. 1977;33(1):159.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Streubel PN. Mortality after periprosthetic femur fractures. J Knee Surg. 2013;26(1):27–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips JRA, Boulton C, Moran CG, et al. What is the financial cost of treating periprosthetic hip fractures?. Injury. 2011;42(2):146–149.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones AR, Williams T, Paringe V, et al. The economic impact of surgically treated peri-prosthetic hip fractures on a university teaching hospital in Wales 7.5-year study. Injury. 2016;47(2):428–431.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brady OH, Garbuz DS, Masri BA, et al. The reliability and validity of the Vancouver classification of femoral fractures after hip replacement. J Arthroplasty. 2000; 15(1):59–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindahl H, Malchau H, Odén A, et al. Risk factors for failure after treatment of a periprosthetic fracture of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88(1):26–30.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Corten K, Vanrykel F, Bellemans J, et al. 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.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lee S, Kagan R, Wang L, et al. Reliability and validity of the Vancouver classification in periprosthetic fractures around cementless femoral stems. J Arthroplasty. 2019;34(7S):S277–S281.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vioreanu MH, Parry MC, Haddad FS, et al. 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang JF, Chen JJ, Shen JJ, et al. The reliability and validity of the Unified Classification System of periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Belg. 2016;82(2):233–239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang JF, Jiang XJ, Shen JJ, et al. Modification of the Unified Classification System for periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci. 2018;23(6):982–986.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fan MQ, Fan XH, Chen XL, et al. The reliability and validity of the modified Unified Classification System for periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci. 2020;S0949-2658(20)30079-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Merwe JM, Haddad FS, Duncan CP. Field testing the Unified Classification System for periprosthetic fractures of the femur, tibia and patella in association with knee replacement: an international collaboration. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B(12):1669–1673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar