Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prophylactic intervention for impending pathological fractures (IF) is associated with improved survival in patients with long-bone metastasis. However, information regarding whether the tumor burden and/or physical status are associated with survival benefits of intervention for IF is lacking. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study investigated 121 patients who underwent surgery for 63 impending and 58 complete metastatic fractures of the proximal femur between 2008 and 2023. After matching for age, sex, body mass index, and Katagiri-New score, 42 patients with IF were compared with 42 patients with complete pathological fractures. The 1-year mortality rate was considered the primary outcome, and was compared and stratified by risk based on the Katagiri-New score. The 1-year mortality rate was evaluated according to the surgical method in the subgroup analysis of patients with IF. RESULTS: The 1-year mortality rate was significantly lower in patients with IF with intermediate-to-high risk(p = 0.04), whereas no difference was observed in patients with low-to-high risk. IF was associated with a significantly higher rate of home discharge (p < 0.01) and improved post-operative ambulatory function (p = 0.07). The subgroup analysis of patients with IF revealed no difference in the survival rate between nailing and hemiarthroplasty. CONCLUSION: Patients with intermediate-to-high risk IF based on the Katagiri-New score had a lower mortality rate than those who underwent surgery for pathological fractures. A higher rate of home discharge was observed in patients with IF. Based on the Katagiri-New score, survival benefits can be obtained from prophylactic intervention for IF of the proximal femur in patients with intermediate-to high-risk.