The choice of bearings in revision total hip arthroplasty : rationale, algorithm, and outcome.

IF 4.9 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Stephen A Jones, Owain Davies, Mohamed Askar
{"title":"The choice of bearings in revision total hip arthroplasty : rationale, algorithm, and outcome.","authors":"Stephen A Jones, Owain Davies, Mohamed Askar","doi":"10.1302/0301-620X.107B6.BJJ-2024-1126.R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The aim of this study was to determine the success of an algorithm designed to guide the choice of bearing based on gluteus medius deficiency to be used in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Dislocation following revision THA remains a leading cause of failure, and while bearings which offer enhanced stability are available, the indications for their use remain unclear. The integrity of the abductor muscles is a major contributor to stability. We describe the use of an algorithm based on gluteus medius deficiency to determine the choice of bearing in revision THA. The default choice in patients with no damage to gluteus medius was a large head, defined as one with a diameter of ≥ 36 mm. Those with gluteus medius deficiency but with preservation of the posterior muscle and tendon were treated with a dual-mobility bearing. A constrained acetabular liner was used in those with complete gluteus medius deficiency. This was a series of consecutive revision THAs undertaken by a single surgeon using this algorithm. The patients were followed to report the rates of dislocation, all-cause re-revision, and Oxford Hip Score (OHS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 311 revision THAs were performed in 259 patients (26 were bilateral) with a mean age of 70 years (32 to 95). At a mean follow-up of 4.8 years (1.0 to 9.0), the dislocation rate for the whole cohort was 4.1% (95% CI 2.4 to 7.0), and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed a 96.1% (95% CI 93.0 to 97.8) dislocation-free survival at 60 months. A large diameter head was the most commonly used bearing, in 164 revisions (53%). There was no significant difference in the dislocation-free survival between the bearings (p = 0.46). The survival free of all-cause re-revision for the whole cohort was 94.2% (95% CI 96.3 to 91.0). The mean OHS improved from 19.6 (2 to 47) preoperatively to 33.9 (4 to 48) at the final follow-up.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings suggest that the algorithm which we describe, based on soft-tissue deficiency at the time of surgery, can allow the successful choice of bearing to be used in revision THA.</p>","PeriodicalId":48944,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Journal","volume":"107-B 6 Supple B","pages":"47-54"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.107B6.BJJ-2024-1126.R1","RegionNum":1,"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

Aims: The aim of this study was to determine the success of an algorithm designed to guide the choice of bearing based on gluteus medius deficiency to be used in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Methods: Dislocation following revision THA remains a leading cause of failure, and while bearings which offer enhanced stability are available, the indications for their use remain unclear. The integrity of the abductor muscles is a major contributor to stability. We describe the use of an algorithm based on gluteus medius deficiency to determine the choice of bearing in revision THA. The default choice in patients with no damage to gluteus medius was a large head, defined as one with a diameter of ≥ 36 mm. Those with gluteus medius deficiency but with preservation of the posterior muscle and tendon were treated with a dual-mobility bearing. A constrained acetabular liner was used in those with complete gluteus medius deficiency. This was a series of consecutive revision THAs undertaken by a single surgeon using this algorithm. The patients were followed to report the rates of dislocation, all-cause re-revision, and Oxford Hip Score (OHS).

Results: A total of 311 revision THAs were performed in 259 patients (26 were bilateral) with a mean age of 70 years (32 to 95). At a mean follow-up of 4.8 years (1.0 to 9.0), the dislocation rate for the whole cohort was 4.1% (95% CI 2.4 to 7.0), and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed a 96.1% (95% CI 93.0 to 97.8) dislocation-free survival at 60 months. A large diameter head was the most commonly used bearing, in 164 revisions (53%). There was no significant difference in the dislocation-free survival between the bearings (p = 0.46). The survival free of all-cause re-revision for the whole cohort was 94.2% (95% CI 96.3 to 91.0). The mean OHS improved from 19.6 (2 to 47) preoperatively to 33.9 (4 to 48) at the final follow-up.

Conclusion: The findings suggest that the algorithm which we describe, based on soft-tissue deficiency at the time of surgery, can allow the successful choice of bearing to be used in revision THA.

翻修全髋关节置换术中轴承的选择:基本原理、算法和结果。
目的:本研究的目的是确定一种算法的成功,该算法设计用于指导臀中肌缺陷在翻修全髋关节置换术(THA)中使用的轴承选择。方法:髋关节置换术后脱位仍然是失败的主要原因,虽然可以提供增强稳定性的轴承,但其使用适应症仍不清楚。外展肌的完整性是稳定的主要因素。我们描述了一种基于臀中肌缺陷的算法来确定翻修THA的方位选择。对于没有臀中肌损伤的患者,默认选择大头,定义为直径≥36mm。臀中肌缺乏但保留后肌和肌腱的患者采用双活动轴承治疗。对于完全臀中肌缺乏的患者,使用受限髋臼衬管。这是由一名外科医生使用该算法进行的一系列连续翻修tha。对患者进行随访,报告脱位率、全因再翻修率和牛津髋关节评分(OHS)。结果:259例患者(26例为双侧)共行311例tha翻修手术,平均年龄为70岁(32 ~ 95岁)。平均随访4.8年(1.0 ~ 9.0年),整个队列脱位率为4.1% (95% CI 2.4 ~ 7.0), Kaplan-Meier生存分析显示,60个月无脱位生存率为96.1% (95% CI 93.0 ~ 97.8)。大直径封头是最常用的轴承,在164次修正中(53%)。两种轴承的无脱位存活率无显著差异(p = 0.46)。全队列无全因再修订生存率为94.2% (95% CI 96.3 ~ 91.0)。平均OHS从术前的19.6(2 ~ 47)提高到最后随访时的33.9(4 ~ 48)。结论:研究结果表明,我们所描述的基于手术时软组织缺陷的算法可以允许在翻修THA时成功选择轴承。
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
Bone & Joint Journal
Bone & Joint Journal ORTHOPEDICS-SURGERY
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
10.90%
发文量
318
期刊介绍: We welcome original articles from any part of the world. The papers are assessed by members of the Editorial Board and our international panel of expert reviewers, then either accepted for publication or rejected by the Editor. We receive over 2000 submissions each year and accept about 250 for publication, many after revisions recommended by the reviewers, editors or statistical advisers. A decision usually takes between six and eight weeks. Each paper is assessed by two reviewers with a special interest in the subject covered by the paper, and also by members of the editorial team. Controversial papers will be discussed at a full meeting of the Editorial Board. Publication is between four and six months after acceptance.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信