双活动全髋关节置换术与常规髋关节置换术治疗股骨颈骨折脱位的关系

IF 0.4 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Matthew C.A. Arnold, John W. Kennedy, Evan Wright, Madeleine Reece, R.M. Dominic Meek
{"title":"双活动全髋关节置换术与常规髋关节置换术治疗股骨颈骨折脱位的关系","authors":"Matthew C.A. Arnold, John W. Kennedy, Evan Wright, Madeleine Reece, R.M. Dominic Meek","doi":"10.3934/medsci.2023023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Neck of femur fractures are extremely common worldwide and have a mortality rate of 15% at 1 year. Dual-mobility cups (DMCs) have demonstrated a reduction in dislocation and revision rates for elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) but the benefits of DMC use in neck of femur fractures are less clear. The aim of this study was to compare the rate of dislocation between conventional and DMC THA following neck of femur fracture. Materials and methods Data was retrospectively collected for patients who received either DMCs or standard acetabular components for neck of femur fractures at our institution. Patients were excluded if they had less than 2 years follow-up. Dislocation and revision rates were collected for all patients in addition to radiographic analysis to assess for loosening. Results Data was collected for 39 patients with DMCs and 95 patients with conventional THA. Two patients with DMCs suffered a dislocation (5.1%) compared to 7 patients (7.3%) who underwent a conventional THA (p = 0.49). Both patients in the DMC group had additional risk factors for dislocation. One DMC patient required revision surgery for dislocation and one conventional THA patient underwent a revision for aspetic loosening. There were no cases of radiographic loosening in the DMC group. Conclusions Our study showed a trend towards lower dislocation rates in patients treated with a DMC compared to conventional THA. Although there are potential issues associated with DMC implants and cost implications, this study suggests they may be advantageous in patients at high risk for dislocation.","PeriodicalId":43011,"journal":{"name":"AIMS Medical Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The association of dual-mobility total hip arthroplasty with dislocation compared to conventional hip arthroplasty for neck of femur fracture\",\"authors\":\"Matthew C.A. Arnold, John W. Kennedy, Evan Wright, Madeleine Reece, R.M. Dominic Meek\",\"doi\":\"10.3934/medsci.2023023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction Neck of femur fractures are extremely common worldwide and have a mortality rate of 15% at 1 year. Dual-mobility cups (DMCs) have demonstrated a reduction in dislocation and revision rates for elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) but the benefits of DMC use in neck of femur fractures are less clear. The aim of this study was to compare the rate of dislocation between conventional and DMC THA following neck of femur fracture. Materials and methods Data was retrospectively collected for patients who received either DMCs or standard acetabular components for neck of femur fractures at our institution. Patients were excluded if they had less than 2 years follow-up. Dislocation and revision rates were collected for all patients in addition to radiographic analysis to assess for loosening. Results Data was collected for 39 patients with DMCs and 95 patients with conventional THA. Two patients with DMCs suffered a dislocation (5.1%) compared to 7 patients (7.3%) who underwent a conventional THA (p = 0.49). Both patients in the DMC group had additional risk factors for dislocation. One DMC patient required revision surgery for dislocation and one conventional THA patient underwent a revision for aspetic loosening. There were no cases of radiographic loosening in the DMC group. Conclusions Our study showed a trend towards lower dislocation rates in patients treated with a DMC compared to conventional THA. Although there are potential issues associated with DMC implants and cost implications, this study suggests they may be advantageous in patients at high risk for dislocation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43011,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AIMS Medical Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AIMS Medical Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3934/medsci.2023023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AIMS Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3934/medsci.2023023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

& lt; abstract> & lt; sec>& lt; title> Introduction< / title><p>股骨颈骨折在世界范围内极为常见,1年死亡率为15%。双活动杯(DMC)已经证明可减少选择性全髋关节置换术(THA)的脱位和翻修率,但DMC用于股骨颈骨折的益处尚不清楚。本研究的目的是比较股骨颈骨折后常规THA和DMC THA的脱位率。& lt; / sec> & lt; sec><title>材料和方法<我们回顾性收集了我院接受dmc或标准髋臼假体治疗股骨颈骨折患者的数据。随访时间少于2年的患者被排除在外。收集所有患者的脱位率和翻修率,并进行影像学分析以评估松动情况。& lt; / sec> & lt; sec>& lt; title> Results< / title>< >收集39例dmc患者和95例常规THA患者的数据。2例dmc患者发生脱位(5.1%),而7例患者(7.3%)接受了常规THA (p = 0.49)。DMC组的两名患者均有脱位的其他危险因素。1例DMC患者因脱位需要翻修手术,1例常规THA患者因骨软化松动需要翻修手术。DMC组无影像学松动病例。</p>& lt; / sec> & lt; sec>& lt; title> Conclusions< / title>我们的研究显示,与传统THA相比,DMC治疗的患者脱位率更低。尽管存在与DMC植入物相关的潜在问题和成本问题,但本研究表明,它们可能对脱位风险高的患者有利。& lt; / sec> & lt; / abstract>
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The association of dual-mobility total hip arthroplasty with dislocation compared to conventional hip arthroplasty for neck of femur fracture
Introduction Neck of femur fractures are extremely common worldwide and have a mortality rate of 15% at 1 year. Dual-mobility cups (DMCs) have demonstrated a reduction in dislocation and revision rates for elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) but the benefits of DMC use in neck of femur fractures are less clear. The aim of this study was to compare the rate of dislocation between conventional and DMC THA following neck of femur fracture. Materials and methods Data was retrospectively collected for patients who received either DMCs or standard acetabular components for neck of femur fractures at our institution. Patients were excluded if they had less than 2 years follow-up. Dislocation and revision rates were collected for all patients in addition to radiographic analysis to assess for loosening. Results Data was collected for 39 patients with DMCs and 95 patients with conventional THA. Two patients with DMCs suffered a dislocation (5.1%) compared to 7 patients (7.3%) who underwent a conventional THA (p = 0.49). Both patients in the DMC group had additional risk factors for dislocation. One DMC patient required revision surgery for dislocation and one conventional THA patient underwent a revision for aspetic loosening. There were no cases of radiographic loosening in the DMC group. Conclusions Our study showed a trend towards lower dislocation rates in patients treated with a DMC compared to conventional THA. Although there are potential issues associated with DMC implants and cost implications, this study suggests they may be advantageous in patients at high risk for dislocation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
AIMS Medical Science
AIMS Medical Science MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
自引率
14.30%
发文量
20
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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