The Selective Use of Acetabular Screws in Routine Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty is Non-Inferior to Habitual Screw Use.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
G A Sheridan, L Y H Low, A J Hughes, P M Courtney, A Sidhu, T MacDonell, L C Howard, M E Neufeld, D S Garbuz, B A Masri
{"title":"The Selective Use of Acetabular Screws in Routine Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty is Non-Inferior to Habitual Screw Use.","authors":"G A Sheridan, L Y H Low, A J Hughes, P M Courtney, A Sidhu, T MacDonell, L C Howard, M E Neufeld, D S Garbuz, B A Masri","doi":"10.1016/j.arth.2025.03.034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The aim of this study was to assess if selective screw insertion can achieve low rates of acetabular component loosening and whether this approach to screw usage is non-inferior to habitual screw insertion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective international multi-center cohort study assessing 4,707 acetabular components for primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) at mean follow-up of 6.5 years. There were 3,855 acetabular components in the selective no-screw (SNS) group, 734 in the selective with-screw (SWS) group, and 118 in the habitual (H) group. The primary outcome was all-cause aseptic revision. Secondary outcomes were all-cause revision and revision for aseptic acetabular loosening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The rate of aseptic revision in the selective user group was 0.89% (41 of 4,589) and 1.7% (two of 118) in the habitual user group (P = 0.467). The aseptic revision rate for SNS, SWS, and H groups was 0.7, 1.5, and 1.6%, respectively (P = 0.71). The all-cause revision rate for SNS, SWS, and H groups was 0.7, 1.5, and 4.2%, respectively (P = 0.001). The revision rate for cup loosening was 0.02% (one of 3,855) in the SNS group, 0.2% (two of 734) in the SWS group, and 0.8% (one of 118) in the H group (P = 0.002). The cumulative screw length (CSL) had no effect on the aseptic revision rate (P = 0.52).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Acetabular components with no screws (SNS) had the lowest rate of all-cause revision, aseptic revision, and revision for acetabular loosening. If screws are inserted, there is no significant difference in results depending on the number of screws inserted or the cumulative screw length. A selective approach to screw insertion is non-inferior to habitual screw insertion and may achieve superior rates of aseptic revision and acetabular loosening.</p>","PeriodicalId":51077,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Arthroplasty","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2025.03.034","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this study was to assess if selective screw insertion can achieve low rates of acetabular component loosening and whether this approach to screw usage is non-inferior to habitual screw insertion.

Methods: This was a retrospective international multi-center cohort study assessing 4,707 acetabular components for primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) at mean follow-up of 6.5 years. There were 3,855 acetabular components in the selective no-screw (SNS) group, 734 in the selective with-screw (SWS) group, and 118 in the habitual (H) group. The primary outcome was all-cause aseptic revision. Secondary outcomes were all-cause revision and revision for aseptic acetabular loosening.

Results: The rate of aseptic revision in the selective user group was 0.89% (41 of 4,589) and 1.7% (two of 118) in the habitual user group (P = 0.467). The aseptic revision rate for SNS, SWS, and H groups was 0.7, 1.5, and 1.6%, respectively (P = 0.71). The all-cause revision rate for SNS, SWS, and H groups was 0.7, 1.5, and 4.2%, respectively (P = 0.001). The revision rate for cup loosening was 0.02% (one of 3,855) in the SNS group, 0.2% (two of 734) in the SWS group, and 0.8% (one of 118) in the H group (P = 0.002). The cumulative screw length (CSL) had no effect on the aseptic revision rate (P = 0.52).

Conclusion: Acetabular components with no screws (SNS) had the lowest rate of all-cause revision, aseptic revision, and revision for acetabular loosening. If screws are inserted, there is no significant difference in results depending on the number of screws inserted or the cumulative screw length. A selective approach to screw insertion is non-inferior to habitual screw insertion and may achieve superior rates of aseptic revision and acetabular loosening.

在常规全髋关节置换术中选择性使用髋臼螺钉并不亚于习惯性使用螺钉。
前言:本研究的目的是评估选择性螺钉插入是否可以实现低髋臼部件松动率,以及这种螺钉使用方法是否优于习惯性螺钉插入。方法:这是一项回顾性的国际多中心队列研究,平均随访6.5年,评估4,707个髋臼假体用于原发性全髋关节置换术(tha)。选择性无螺钉(SNS)组有3855个髋臼假体,选择性有螺钉(SWS)组有734个,习惯性(H)组有118个。主要结果为全因无菌改良。次要结果为全因翻修和无菌性髋臼松动翻修。结果:选择性用户组无菌修改率为0.89%(4589人中41人),习惯性用户组为1.7%(118人中2人)(P = 0.467)。SNS组、SWS组和H组的无菌改良率分别为0.7、1.5和1.6% (P = 0.71)。SNS组、SWS组和H组的全因修正率分别为0.7、1.5和4.2% (P = 0.001)。SNS组的杯型松动矫正率为0.02% (1 / 3855),SWS组为0.2% (2 / 734),H组为0.8% (1 / 118)(P = 0.002)。累积螺钉长度(CSL)对无菌改良率无影响(P = 0.52)。结论:无螺钉髋臼假体(SNS)的全因翻修、无菌翻修和髋臼松动翻修率最低。如果有螺钉插入,不同的螺钉插入数和累计螺钉长度对结果没有明显的影响。选择性入路螺钉置入优于习惯性入路螺钉置入,并可获得更高的无菌翻修率和髋臼松动率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Arthroplasty
Journal of Arthroplasty 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
734
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Arthroplasty brings together the clinical and scientific foundations for joint replacement. This peer-reviewed journal publishes original research and manuscripts of the highest quality from all areas relating to joint replacement or the treatment of its complications, including those dealing with clinical series and experience, prosthetic design, biomechanics, biomaterials, metallurgy, biologic response to arthroplasty materials in vivo and in vitro.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信