Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty with Primary Stem or Full-Porous-Coated Long Stem for Aseptic Femoral Component Loosening: A Matched-Pair Study.

IF 2.3 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopedic Research and Reviews Pub Date : 2022-02-15 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.2147/ORR.S346891
Meng-Huan Tsai, Chun-Chieh Chen, Chih-Hsiang Chang, Yuhan Chang, Pang-Hsin Hsieh, Chih-Chien Hu
{"title":"Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty with Primary Stem or Full-Porous-Coated Long Stem for Aseptic Femoral Component Loosening: A Matched-Pair Study.","authors":"Meng-Huan Tsai,&nbsp;Chun-Chieh Chen,&nbsp;Chih-Hsiang Chang,&nbsp;Yuhan Chang,&nbsp;Pang-Hsin Hsieh,&nbsp;Chih-Chien Hu","doi":"10.2147/ORR.S346891","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Revision total hip arthroplasty (RTHA) for loosening the femoral stem is a technical challenge. Distally fixed, full-porous-coated long stems are widely accepted as the standard selection for these revisions. However, the success of primary stems in RTHA is not well known.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study enrolled 24 patients with aseptic loosening of the femoral stem who underwent RTHA using primary stems. Another 72 patients with aseptic loosening who underwent RTHA using full-porous-coated long stems were matched in terms of operation date, proximal femoral bone stock (Paprosky classification), sex, and age. The primary and secondary outcomes of failure were the need for revision for any reason and the radiographic change in the stem respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the primary stem group, one patient had a periprosthetic fracture and received a second RTHA 2 years after the previous one. The primary outcome's 5-and 10-year survival rates were both 95.8%. For the matched comparison group, one patient had an immediate periprosthetic fracture of the femoral shaft requiring further open reduction internal fixation surgery. Another patient had a full-porous-coated long stem breakage 6 years postoperatively, which required a second RTHA. The primary outcome's 5-and 10-year survival rates were 98.6% and 97.2%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Primary stems can achieve non-inferior clinical success compared to a full-porous-coated long stem for aseptic stem loosening RTHA in patients with adequate proximal femoral bone stock.</p>","PeriodicalId":19608,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedic Research and Reviews","volume":" ","pages":"25-33"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/fc/35/orr-14-25.PMC8857999.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedic Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/ORR.S346891","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Revision total hip arthroplasty (RTHA) for loosening the femoral stem is a technical challenge. Distally fixed, full-porous-coated long stems are widely accepted as the standard selection for these revisions. However, the success of primary stems in RTHA is not well known.

Methods: This study enrolled 24 patients with aseptic loosening of the femoral stem who underwent RTHA using primary stems. Another 72 patients with aseptic loosening who underwent RTHA using full-porous-coated long stems were matched in terms of operation date, proximal femoral bone stock (Paprosky classification), sex, and age. The primary and secondary outcomes of failure were the need for revision for any reason and the radiographic change in the stem respectively.

Results: In the primary stem group, one patient had a periprosthetic fracture and received a second RTHA 2 years after the previous one. The primary outcome's 5-and 10-year survival rates were both 95.8%. For the matched comparison group, one patient had an immediate periprosthetic fracture of the femoral shaft requiring further open reduction internal fixation surgery. Another patient had a full-porous-coated long stem breakage 6 years postoperatively, which required a second RTHA. The primary outcome's 5-and 10-year survival rates were 98.6% and 97.2%, respectively.

Conclusion: Primary stems can achieve non-inferior clinical success compared to a full-porous-coated long stem for aseptic stem loosening RTHA in patients with adequate proximal femoral bone stock.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

无菌股骨假体松动的翻修全髋关节置换术采用初级假体或全多孔涂层长假体:配对研究。
背景:改良全髋关节置换术(RTHA)是一项技术挑战。远端固定,全多孔涂层长杆被广泛接受为这些改版的标准选择。然而,主茎在RTHA中的成功尚不为人所知。方法:本研究招募了24例无菌性股骨干松动患者,这些患者采用原发股骨干行RTHA。另外72例无菌性松动患者采用全多孔包膜长柄行RTHA,在手术日期、股骨近端骨(帕普罗斯基分类)、性别和年龄方面进行匹配。失败的主要和次要结果分别是出于任何原因需要翻修和影像学改变。结果:在原发性干细胞组中,1例患者发生假体周围骨折,并在前一例术后2年接受了第二次RTHA。主要终点的5年和10年生存率均为95.8%。在匹配的对照组中,1例患者立即发生假体周围股骨干骨折,需要进一步进行切开复位内固定手术。另一名患者术后6年出现全多孔涂层长茎断裂,需要进行第二次RTHA。主要终点的5年和10年生存率分别为98.6%和97.2%。结论:与全多孔涂层长柄相比,对于具有足够股骨近端骨的无菌柄松动RTHA患者,初级柄可以获得良好的临床成功。
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
Orthopedic Research and Reviews
Orthopedic Research and Reviews Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopedic Research and Reviews is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal focusing on the patho-physiology of the musculoskeletal system, trauma, surgery and other corrective interventions to restore mobility and function. Advances in new technologies, materials, techniques and pharmacological agents will be particularly welcome. Specific topics covered in the journal include: Patho-physiology and bioengineering, Technologies and materials science, Surgical techniques, including robotics, Trauma management and care, Treatment including pharmacological and non-pharmacological, Rehabilitation and Multidisciplinarian care approaches, Patient quality of life, satisfaction and preference, Health economic evaluations. The journal welcomes submitted papers covering original research, basic science and technology, clinical studies, reviews and evaluations, guidelines, expert opinion and commentary, case reports and extended reports.
×
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