BackgroundVancouver B2 periprosthetic femur fractures have traditionally been treated with revision arthroplasty. However, there is increasing evidence that open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) may be a valid alternative treatment strategy. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of ORIF versus revision arthroplasty for the treatment of Vancouver B2 fractures and evaluate the influence of the treating surgeon’s fellowship training on treatment selection.MethodologyThis was a retrospective cohort study of 31 patients treated for Vancouver B2 periprosthetic fractures (16 ORIF and 15 revision arthroplasty) at a single academic Level 1 trauma center. Outcome measures included one-year mortality, revision, reoperation, infection, and blood loss.ResultsThere were no statistically significant differences in revision, reoperation, or infection at an average follow-up of 65 weeks. Median estimated blood loss was higher in the arthroplasty group (700 cc versus 400 cc;P= 0.04). There were five deaths in the ORIF group versus one in the revision group (P= 0.18). Cases treated by surgeons with fellowship training in arthroplasty were more likely to be treated with revision arthroplasty (10/11, 90.9%) than those treated by surgeons with fellowship training in trauma (5/15, 33.3%;P< 0.01).ConclusionsThere was no difference in outcomes between the two treatment strategies, but revision was associated with higher blood loss. The appropriate treatment method should be based on surgeon familiarity and patients' characteristics.