Subtrochanteric/Diaphyseal | Transverse or Short Oblique | Associated with Prolonged Antiresorptive Therapy
- ASBMR criteria define atypical fractures - learn the 5 major features
- Bisphosphonate use greater than 5 years significantly increases risk
- Check contralateral femur - 28% bilateral, may be prodromal
- Drug holiday consideration after complete fracture
- IM nail preferred - allows prophylactic fixation of contralateral
- βProdromal thigh pain in 70% - often for weeks/months before fracture
- βLateral cortex stress reaction is pathognomonic on X-ray
- βRisk-benefit still favors bisphosphonates in most osteoporotic patients
- βGlucocorticoid use and Asian ethnicity increase risk
4 of 5 major criteria must be present for diagnosis. Location (subtrochanteric/diaphyseal), transverse/short oblique pattern, minimal trauma, non-comminuted, lateral cortex beaking. Know these criteria.
70% have prodromal thigh pain for weeks to months before complete fracture. This is a missed opportunity for prophylactic treatment. Any patient on bisphosphonates with thigh pain needs imaging.
28% have bilateral involvement. Always image the contralateral femur. May be prodromal (incomplete fracture) requiring prophylactic fixation. Same surgery session if complete and prodromal.
Intramedullary nail is preferred fixation. Allows load-sharing, protects entire femur, enables prophylactic fixation of contralateral. Avoid lateral plate alone (stress riser at plate end).
- Key Action
- Confirm ASBMR criteria, image contralateral
- Treatment
- IM nail fixation, consider drug holiday
- Key Action
- Protected weight bearing, serial imaging
- Treatment
- Prophylactic IM nail if progression or persistent pain
- Key Action
- X-ray and MRI if X-ray negative
- Treatment
- Stop bisphosphonate, calcium/vitamin D, monitor
- Key Action
- Stage surgery or fix both at same session
- Treatment
- IM nail both femurs
- Key Action
- Drug holiday vs alternative agent
- Treatment
- Endocrinology referral, fracture liaison service
BISPHOSPHONATEBISPHOSPHONATE - Risk Factors
Hook:The drug name reminds you of risk factors - duration is key
NAILNAIL - Why IM Nail Preferred
Hook:NAIL is the answer for atypical femoral fractures
Overview and Epidemiology
Atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) are stress fractures of the femoral shaft associated with prolonged antiresorptive therapy, particularly bisphosphonates. They have distinct clinical and radiographic features.
Historical context:
- First reports emerged in 2005-2007
- ASBMR Task Force criteria established 2010, revised 2013
- Led to "drug holiday" concept for long-term bisphosphonate users
Despite concerns about AFFs, bisphosphonates prevent far more fractures than they cause. The incidence of AFF is approximately 3-10 per 10,000 patient-years, while bisphosphonates prevent approximately 300 hip fractures per 10,000 patient-years. The risk-benefit still strongly favors treatment in most osteoporotic patients.
- Incidence: 3-10 per 10,000 patient-years (increases with duration)
- Female predominance (reflects bisphosphonate use patterns)
- Mean age 65-75 years
- Asian ethnicity: higher risk
- Risk increases exponentially after 5+ years of bisphosphonate use
- Duration of bisphosphonate use (most important - risk doubles after 5 years)
- Glucocorticoid use
- Asian ethnicity
- Femoral bowing (varus geometry)
- Rheumatoid arthritis
- Prior contralateral AFF
- Vitamin D deficiency
Anatomy and Pathophysiology
Location of atypical fractures:
AFFs occur in specific locations:
- Subtrochanteric region: 5cm distal to lesser trochanter
- Femoral shaft (diaphysis): To supracondylar flare
These locations correlate with areas of maximum tensile stress on the lateral cortex during gait.
How bisphosphonates contribute to AFFs:
-
Suppressed bone turnover:
- Bisphosphonates inhibit osteoclast activity
- Bone remodeling is suppressed
- Microdamage accumulates without repair
-
Altered bone quality:
- Increased mineralization over time
- More homogeneous bone matrix
- Reduced ability to absorb energy (more brittle)
-
Stress fracture progression:
- Microcracks develop in lateral cortex
- Unable to heal due to suppressed turnover
- Progress to complete fracture
The lateral cortex is under maximum tension during weight-bearing, making it vulnerable to stress fracture development.
Classification - ASBMR Criteria
ASBMR 2013 Revised Major Criteria
To diagnose an atypical femoral fracture, 4 of 5 major criteria must be present:
- Description
- Subtrochanteric or diaphyseal
- Key Points
- Distal to lesser trochanter to supracondylar
- Description
- Transverse or short oblique
- Key Points
- Less than 30 degrees from horizontal
- Description
- Minimal or no trauma
- Key Points
- Fall from standing or less, no trauma
- Description
- Non-comminuted or minimal
- Key Points
- Simple fracture pattern
- Description
- Localized periosteal/endosteal reaction
- Key Points
- Cortical thickening, beaking
Lateral cortex beaking is the pathognomonic feature. It represents the stress reaction where the fracture initiates. On X-ray, look for localized cortical thickening with a transverse lucent line.
ASBMRASBMR - Major Criteria
Hook:ASBMR = American Society for Bone and Mineral Research - use their initials for criteria
Clinical Presentation and Assessment
History:
- Duration and type of bisphosphonate/antiresorptive therapy
- Prodromal thigh or groin pain (present in 70%)
- Mechanism of fracture (usually minimal trauma)
- Previous contralateral symptoms or fracture
- Osteoporosis treatment history
- Glucocorticoid use
Prodromal symptoms:
- Characteristic
- Anterior or lateral thigh
- Clinical Significance
- May precede complete fracture by weeks to months
- Characteristic
- Worse with weight bearing
- Clinical Significance
- Typical stress fracture behavior
- Characteristic
- May have night pain
- Clinical Significance
- Indicates progressive stress reaction
- Characteristic
- 28% have bilateral involvement
- Clinical Significance
- Always image contralateral femur
- Shortened, externally rotated limb
- Thigh swelling and deformity
- Unable to bear weight
- Neurovascular examination (usually intact)
- Skin assessment for open injury
- May have normal appearance
- Point tenderness over lateral thigh
- Pain with weight bearing
- Full range of hip motion usually preserved
70% of patients with complete AFFs report prodromal thigh pain for weeks to months beforehand. This represents a missed opportunity for intervention. Any patient on long-term bisphosphonates with thigh pain should have imaging to rule out stress fracture.
THIGHTHIGH - Prodromal Symptoms
Hook:THIGH pain in bisphosphonate users should raise suspicion
Investigations
Radiographic assessment:
Plain X-rays (AP and lateral femur):
- Full-length femur views essential
- Look for lateral cortex beaking/thickening
- Transverse fracture line orientation
- Check for contralateral changes (bilateral imaging mandatory)
Key X-ray findings:
- Description
- Localized cortical thickening
- Significance
- Pathognomonic stress reaction
- Description
- Crack in lateral cortex
- Significance
- Incomplete fracture
- Description
- Transverse pattern, minimal comminution
- Significance
- Meets ASBMR criteria
- Description
- Medial cortex beak on complete fracture
- Significance
- Common finding
Always obtain full-length femur X-rays. This allows assessment of the entire femur for stress reactions and helps plan surgical fixation (nail length, starting point).
- Bone marrow edema at stress reaction site
- Fracture line may be visible before X-ray changes
- Useful for early/incomplete fractures
- Hot spot at stress fracture site
- Less specific than MRI
- Can assess bilateral involvement
- Better cortical detail than X-ray
- Can show early cortical changes
- Helpful for surgical planning
- Vitamin D level (deficiency common, affects healing)
- Calcium, phosphate
- Alkaline phosphatase (low in hypophosphatasia)
- PTH if secondary hyperparathyroidism suspected
- Bone turnover markers (research interest)
- Typical Features
- Transverse/short-oblique lateral-origin fracture, minimal trauma, lateral cortex beaking
- Key Distinguishing Points
- Long-term antiresorptive use, non-comminuted, prodromal thigh pain, often bilateral
- Typical Features
- Spiral or comminuted, low bone density
- Key Distinguishing Points
- High(er) energy or comminuted pattern, no lateral beaking, no defining antiresorptive link
- Typical Features
- Lytic or destructive lesion at fracture site
- Key Distinguishing Points
- Visible bone destruction, known malignancy, soft-tissue mass; biopsy/staging if uncertain
- Typical Features
- Athletes, military recruits, abrupt training change
- Key Distinguishing Points
- No antiresorptive history; commonly medial/compression side rather than lateral tension cortex
- Typical Features
- Pseudofractures, low alkaline phosphatase (hypophosphatasia)
- Key Distinguishing Points
- Low ALP, characteristic metabolic bone disease pattern, may mimic incomplete AFF
- Typical Features
- Fracture at stem or plate tip stress riser
- Key Distinguishing Points
- Implant in situ; manage as periprosthetic - but AFF pattern may coexist in antiresorptive users
Peritrochanteric fractures (intertrochanteric and femoral neck) are NOT atypical femoral fractures, even in bisphosphonate users. The ASBMR criteria specifically exclude the peritrochanteric region.


Management

Surgical fixation is required for all complete AFFs.
Preferred fixation: Intramedullary nail
- Cephalomedullary nail (e.g., gamma nail, PFNA)
- Provides load-sharing fixation
- Protects entire femur
- Allows immediate weight bearing (depending on fixation)
- Enables bilateral fixation at same sitting
Surgical considerations:
- Entry point: piriformis or trochanteric entry based on nail design
- Ensure good distal locking
- Consider supplementary fixation if comminuted
- Assess and address contralateral femur
Lateral plate fixation alone should be avoided for atypical fractures. The plate creates a stress riser at its ends, and the abnormal bone quality may predispose to failure. IM nail is preferred. If plate is used, protect entire femur.
Surgical Technique

- Supine on fracture table (radiolucent)
- Boot attached with traction
- Contralateral leg in lithotomy or extended
- C-arm access for AP and lateral views
- Traction and internal rotation typically reduces
- May need external reduction aids if shortening/rotation
- Varus tendency common - ensure proper alignment
- Confirm reduction on fluoroscopy before nailing
- Atypical fractures often have sharp transverse edges
- May need to open and reduce if closed reduction fails
- Avoid excessive manipulation (bone quality poor)
Proper positioning and reduction are essential before proceeding with nailing.
A favourite operative-pitfall question: the same patients prone to AFF (older, often Asian, with femoral varus/bowing) have femora that do not accept a standard straight intramedullary nail, and this mismatch causes intra-operative disasters:
- The problem: a Western straight (or standard-radius) nail in a markedly bowed, hard, brittle diaphysis impinges on the anterior and/or lateral cortex - risking iatrogenic cortical perforation/fracture, malreduction into the bow (apex-anterior/varus), and inability to fully seat the nail. The dense, low-turnover bone is unforgiving.
- Planning: template the radius of curvature against the implant on full-length films; in a very bowed femur choose a nail whose curvature matches the bone (smaller radius of curvature), a shorter nail that stops before the distal bow, or accept a more distal starting point - and have a contingency for opening the fracture.
- Intra-operative: ream carefully (brittle bone), advance the nail slowly watching the cortices on orthogonal fluoroscopy, and use blocking (Poller) screws or an open reduction to steer the nail and prevent the malalignment the bow tends to impose; for a severe deformity a corrective osteotomy at the apex may be needed to pass the nail and restore alignment.
- Special case - peri-implant: an AFF can occur at the tip of a hip stem or below a sliding hip screw plate; here a nail may not be possible and a plate (or revision arthroplasty) spanning the whole bone is used instead.
Exam point: anticipate nail-bone mismatch in the bowed AFF femur - match the nail's radius of curvature (or use a shorter nail/blocking screws/osteotomy), ream gently and advance slowly to avoid cortical perforation and malreduction into the bow.
Complications
- Incidence
- 20-30%
- Prevention/Management
- Teriparatide, revision surgery, bone graft
- Incidence
- 28% overall
- Prevention/Management
- Prophylactic fixation, imaging surveillance
- Incidence
- 5-10%
- Prevention/Management
- Long nail, protect entire femur
- Incidence
- Variable
- Prevention/Management
- Adequate fixation, consider bone quality
- Incidence
- Common
- Prevention/Management
- May relate to implant, bone healing, or new stress reaction
- Incidence
- Variable
- Prevention/Management
- Careful intraoperative assessment, long nail
- Higher rate than typical femoral fractures (20-30%)
- Related to suppressed bone turnover
- Consider teriparatide to stimulate healing
- May need revision with bone grafting
- Endocrinology involvement for optimization
- 28% have bilateral involvement
- May present simultaneously or sequentially
- Emphasizes need for contralateral imaging
- Prophylactic fixation if incomplete fracture identified
AFFs have higher rates of delayed union and nonunion (20-30%) compared to typical femoral shaft fractures. This is due to the underlying suppressed bone turnover from bisphosphonate use. Teriparatide may help stimulate healing.
The high nonunion rate is not only from suppressed bone turnover - a large part is surgeon-modifiable, and this is the point examiners want beyond "the bone is slow to heal":
- Varus malreduction is the enemy: AFFs are transverse fractures of a bowed, varus femur, so a nail naturally tends to leave the fracture in varus and apex-anterior - and malalignment (especially varus) is independently associated with delayed/failed union (the topic's own Egol data). Aim for an anatomic, slightly valgus-not-varus reduction.
- Close the gap, achieve cortical contact: a transverse fracture must be well-apposed and compressed, not distracted. A residual fracture gap in low-turnover bone will not bridge - "fit-and-fill" the canal, back-slap/compress to close the gap, and open the fracture if a closed reduction leaves a gap or malalignment (open reduction does not preclude union and lets you remove interposed tissue and apply a reduction clamp).
- Mechanical environment: avoid both excessive rigidity with a gap (no callus stimulus) and instability; a load-sharing full-length nail with good cortical apposition is the goal, with supplementary plating reserved for refractory cases.
- Biology in parallel: stop the antiresorptive, optimise vitamin D/calcium, and consider teriparatide - but biology will not rescue a malaligned, gapped construct.
Exam point: most AFF nonunions are predictable - avoid varus malreduction and a residual fracture gap, achieve compressed cortical contact (open the fracture if needed), and add anabolic/biological optimisation; a well-aligned, apposed nail is the single best determinant of union.
Postoperative Care and Rehabilitation
Postoperative protocol:
- Weight bearing as tolerated (typically)
- DVT prophylaxis
- Pain management
- Early mobilization with physiotherapy
- Wound care
- Progressive ambulation
- Discharge home when safe
- Outpatient physiotherapy
- Monitor wound healing
- X-ray at 6 weeks
- Continued strengthening
- Serial X-rays to monitor healing
- Watch for delayed union
- May require extended time to unite
- Consider teriparatide if delayed
- Ongoing healing assessment
- May take 6-12 months to fully unite
- Address bone health
- Endocrinology referral for osteoporosis management
- Drug holiday discussion
- Early weight bearing with IM nail
- Balance mobility with healing monitoring
- Extended healing time expected
- Address falls risk
- Comprehensive bone health management
- Stop bisphosphonate (drug holiday)
- Calcium 1000-1200mg/day
- Vitamin D to normalize levels (target greater than 50nmol/L)
- Refer to endocrinology/bone specialist
- Consider teriparatide if delayed union
- Fracture liaison service involvement
Outcomes and Prognosis
Healing outcomes:
- Impact on Outcome
- Longer duration associated with slower healing
- Impact on Outcome
- Nail has better outcomes, fewer complications
- Impact on Outcome
- May accelerate healing
- Impact on Outcome
- Deficiency delays healing
- Impact on Outcome
- Delays healing
- Impact on Outcome
- Increases morbidity
Functional outcomes:
- Most patients return to pre-injury function
- Some persistent thigh discomfort common
- Hardware removal rarely needed
- Falls prevention important to prevent contralateral fracture
After AFF, patients require ongoing bone health management. This includes drug holiday from bisphosphonates, consideration of alternative treatments (teriparatide), optimization of calcium/vitamin D, and surveillance for contralateral involvement. Fracture liaison service involvement is recommended.
Guidelines, Registries & Global Practice
Global epidemiology (PubMed-verified): The absolute risk of atypical femoral fracture (AFF) in patients on bisphosphonates is consistently low across registries, while the relative risk is high and strongly duration-dependent. Asian ethnicity is a striking, duration-independent risk factor reported across multiple health systems.
- AFF incidence or risk
- Absolute increase 5 per 10,000 patient-years; RR 47.3
- Notes
- Risk falls ~70% per year after withdrawal
- AFF incidence or risk
- 1.78 β 113.1 per 100,000/yr (0β2 vs 8β10 yr use)
- Notes
- Incidence rises sharply with duration
- AFF incidence or risk
- HR 8.86 at 3β5 yr β 43.51 at greater than 8 yr
- Notes
- Asian vs White HR 4.84
- AFF incidence or risk
- Asian 64.2 vs White 7.6 per 100,000/yr (8-fold)
- Notes
- Adjusted HR 8.5
Side-by-side guidance from major bodies:
- Core guidance on AFF / long-term antiresorptives
- 5 major / 4 minor criteria; reassess after 5 yr oral or 3 yr IV; drug holiday 2β3 yr if no longer high-risk; continue to 10 yr (oral)/6 yr (IV) if high-risk
- Evidence level
- Expert consensus on cohort data
- Core guidance on AFF / long-term antiresorptives
- IM nailing preferred for complete AFF; image and consider prophylactic fixation of contralateral femur; multidisciplinary bone-health pathway
- Evidence level
- Consensus / cohort
- Core guidance on AFF / long-term antiresorptives
- Review bisphosphonate need after 5 years (3 yr for IV zoledronate); reassess fracture risk; consider holiday in lower-risk patients
- Evidence level
- Guideline
- Core guidance on AFF / long-term antiresorptives
- Investigate thigh/groin pain in long-term users with full-length femoral imaging; stop antiresorptive if AFF confirmed
- Evidence level
- Guideline
The dominant data come from integrated-care cohorts (Kaiser Permanente) and national registries (Sweden) rather than arthroplasty-style implant registries, because AFF is a pharmacovigilance rather than a device outcome. These consistently show the same message: net benefit of treatment is large in lower-risk (often White) populations and attenuated, though usually still favourable, in Asian patients.
Concern about AFF has been associated with a substantial fall in bisphosphonate prescribing and a possible rise in hip-fracture incidence in some health systems (Black 2020). Drug-holiday thresholds, the weight given to Asian ethnicity, and the threshold for prophylactic contralateral nailing all vary between centres.
Availability of anabolic therapy (e.g. teriparatide for severe osteoporosis or high fracture risk) varies between health systems and influences the choice of post-fracture agent. In populations where patients of Asian ancestry make up a larger share of those treated, ethnicity-specific counselling on duration and risk-benefit carries particular weight. Fracture liaison services remain central to secondary prevention across all settings.
In the Orthopaedic exam, be prepared to discuss the ASBMR criteria (know all 5 major criteria, with lateral cortex beaking now a MAJOR feature), the importance of full-length imaging of both femora, and the rationale for IM nail fixation. Understand drug-holiday concepts (reassess after 5 yr oral / 3 yr IV) and the role of teriparatide in delayed healing.
MCQ Practice Points
Q: How many of the ASBMR major criteria must be present to diagnose an atypical femoral fracture? A: 4 of 5 major criteria must be present: subtrochanteric/diaphyseal location, transverse or short oblique pattern, minimal/no trauma, non-comminuted or minimal comminution, lateral cortex beaking.
Q: What is the most important risk factor for atypical femoral fractures? A: Duration of bisphosphonate use. Risk increases exponentially after 5 years of use, with risk doubling approximately every 2 years of continued use.
Q: What percentage of patients have prodromal symptoms before a complete atypical femoral fracture? A: 70% of patients report thigh or groin pain for weeks to months before the complete fracture. This represents an opportunity for early detection and prophylactic treatment.
Q: What is the preferred fixation for atypical femoral fractures and why? A: Intramedullary nail is preferred because it is load-sharing (protects abnormal bone), protects the entire femur, and allows prophylactic fixation of the contralateral femur. Lateral plate alone is associated with higher failure rates.
Q: What percentage of patients with atypical femoral fracture have bilateral involvement? A: 28% have bilateral involvement. This is why imaging of the contralateral femur is mandatory, and prophylactic fixation should be considered if incomplete fracture is identified.
Clinical Decision Scenarios
Practise clinical reasoning and management decisions out loud
βA 72-year-old woman on alendronate for 8 years presents after a fall from standing. X-rays show a transverse subtrochanteric fracture with minimal comminution and lateral cortex thickening. What is your diagnosis and management?β
βA 68-year-old woman on denosumab for 4 years presents with 3 months of left thigh pain. X-rays show localized lateral cortex thickening in the subtrochanteric region with a faint transverse lucency. She can walk with a limp. What is your management?β
βA patient had IM nailing of an atypical femoral fracture 9 months ago. She has persistent thigh pain. X-rays show no callus bridging and a persistent fracture line. What is your approach?β
ASBMR MAJOR CRITERIA (4 of 5 Required)
- 1. Location: Subtrochanteric or femoral shaft
- 2. Pattern: Transverse or short oblique (less than 30 degrees)
- 3. Trauma: Minimal or no trauma
- 4. Comminution: Non-comminuted or minimal
- 5. Lateral cortex: Localized periosteal/endosteal reaction (beaking)
KEY RISK FACTORS
- Bisphosphonate duration greater than 5 years (most important)
- Glucocorticoid use
- Asian ethnicity
- Femoral varus/bowing
- Prior contralateral AFF
SURGICAL MANAGEMENT
- IM nail preferred (load-sharing, protects whole femur)
- Avoid lateral plate alone (stress riser)
- Always image contralateral (28% bilateral)
- Prophylactic nail if incomplete fracture
- Consider bilateral fixation at same sitting
POST-FRACTURE BONE HEALTH
- Stop bisphosphonate (drug holiday)
- Optimize vitamin D (target greater than 50nmol/L)
- Calcium supplementation
- Consider teriparatide if delayed union
- Endocrinology referral
COMPLICATIONS
- Delayed union/nonunion (20-30%)
- Contralateral fracture (28%)
- Refracture
- Prolonged healing time
TRAPS AND PEARLS
- 70% have prodromal thigh pain - investigate!
- Risk-benefit still favors bisphosphonates overall
- Lateral beaking is pathognomonic
- Peritrochanteric fractures are NOT atypical
- Expect longer healing than typical fractures
Evidence Base
- Revised case definition: 5 major and 4 minor features, with 4 of 5 major features required for diagnosis. The periosteal/endosteal lateral cortex stress reaction was upgraded from a minor to a major feature, and disease/drug associations were removed from the case definition. AFFs are characterised as stress or insufficiency fractures. Absolute risk on bisphosphonates is low (3.2 to 50 per 100,000 person-years), rising to approximately 100 per 100,000 person-years with long-term use.
- Adjusted hazard ratio for AFF rose with bisphosphonate duration: 8.86 at 3 to less than 5 years and 43.51 at 8 or more years (versus less than 3 months). Risk fell rapidly after discontinuation. Asian women had higher risk than White women (HR 4.84). After 3 years of treatment in White women, 149 hip fractures were prevented for every 2 bisphosphonate-associated AFFs, versus 91 hip fractures prevented for 8 AFFs in Asian women.
- In 1.8 million patients, age-adjusted AFF incidence rose from 1.78 per 100,000 person-years at 0.1 to 1.9 years of bisphosphonate exposure to 113.1 per 100,000 person-years at 8 to 9.9 years. Of 142 atypical fractures, 128 had bisphosphonate exposure (mean 5.5 years).
- Nationwide cohort: age-adjusted relative risk of AFF with bisphosphonate use was 47.3, but the absolute increase was only 5 cases per 10,000 patient-years. Risk diminished by approximately 70% per year after drug withdrawal.
- Among 48,390 women starting oral bisphosphonates, AFF rate was 8-fold higher in Asian than White women (64.2 versus 7.6 per 100,000 person-years; age-adjusted HR 8.5, reduced to 6.6 after adjusting for bisphosphonate duration).
- After 5 years of oral or 3 years of intravenous bisphosphonate, reassess fracture risk. High-risk patients (low hip T-score, prior fracture, fracture on therapy) may continue to 10 years oral or 6 years IV. For patients no longer at high risk, a drug holiday of 2 to 3 years can be considered. AFF risk clearly rises with treatment duration but is outweighed by vertebral fracture reduction in high-risk patients.
- In 33 patients (41 complete AFFs, mean 8.8 years of bisphosphonate use) treated with intramedullary nailing, 98% were radiographically healed by 12 months although healing was delayed, particularly when malaligned. Patients reported a mean of 6 months of prodromal pain; 64% returned to baseline function within 1 year.