现代无骨水泥髋臼杯在原发性骨关节炎全髋关节置换术中的应用:一项比较登记研究。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Francesco Castagnini, Barbara Bordini, Monica Cosentino, Francesco Pardo, Mara Gorgone, Francesco Traina
{"title":"现代无骨水泥髋臼杯在原发性骨关节炎全髋关节置换术中的应用:一项比较登记研究。","authors":"Francesco Castagnini, Barbara Bordini, Monica Cosentino, Francesco Pardo, Mara Gorgone, Francesco Traina","doi":"10.1007/s00402-024-05573-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Comparative studies evaluating the different material and surface finishing of acetabular components in total hip arthroplasty (THA) are lacking. Using a regional arthroplasty registry, the survival rates and the hazard ratios of different cups in THA performed for primary osteoarthritis were assessed, using endpoints: (1) every cup failure, (2) cup aseptic loosening, (3) periprosthetic infection.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The inclusion criteria were: residing patients, THA for primary osteoarthritis, Delta-on-Delta bearings, head sizes 32 mm and 36 mm. Only the most implanted cementless cups were considered and were grouped according to material and surface finishing into three cohorts: 3D printed cups (I), ultraporous tantalum or titanium- coated cups (II), second-generation cups (III). 15,737 cups were included in the study: 9,862 cups (62.7%) in cohort I, 2,067 implants (13.1%) in cohort II, 3,808 implants (24.2%) in cohort III.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The three cohorts achieved comparable general 10-year survival rates (p = 0.62). In I and II cohorts, the survival rates of the cup types within cohorts were analogous (p = 0.86 and p = 0.31), but not in cohort III (p = 0.004). The hazard ratios for overall failure adjusted for age and sex were similar among the cohorts. Regarding cup aseptic loosening, the three cohorts had similar rates (p = 0.48) and similar adjusted hazard ratios. With periprosthetic hip infection as endpoint, the survival rates and the adjusted hazard ratios of the three cohorts were comparable (p = 0.68).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>3D printed cups provided similar 10-year outcomes compared to ultraporous cups and second-generation cups, with no additional risks of aseptic loosening and infection.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>IV (therapeutic study).</p><p><strong>Take home message: </strong>- 3D printed cups provided similar 10-year outcomes compared to ultraporous cups and second-generation cups. - There is no additional risks of aseptic loosening and infection.</p>","PeriodicalId":8326,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modern cementless acetabular cups in total hip arthroplasty performed for primary osteoarthritis: a comparative registry study.\",\"authors\":\"Francesco Castagnini, Barbara Bordini, Monica Cosentino, Francesco Pardo, Mara Gorgone, Francesco Traina\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00402-024-05573-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Comparative studies evaluating the different material and surface finishing of acetabular components in total hip arthroplasty (THA) are lacking. Using a regional arthroplasty registry, the survival rates and the hazard ratios of different cups in THA performed for primary osteoarthritis were assessed, using endpoints: (1) every cup failure, (2) cup aseptic loosening, (3) periprosthetic infection.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The inclusion criteria were: residing patients, THA for primary osteoarthritis, Delta-on-Delta bearings, head sizes 32 mm and 36 mm. Only the most implanted cementless cups were considered and were grouped according to material and surface finishing into three cohorts: 3D printed cups (I), ultraporous tantalum or titanium- coated cups (II), second-generation cups (III). 15,737 cups were included in the study: 9,862 cups (62.7%) in cohort I, 2,067 implants (13.1%) in cohort II, 3,808 implants (24.2%) in cohort III.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The three cohorts achieved comparable general 10-year survival rates (p = 0.62). In I and II cohorts, the survival rates of the cup types within cohorts were analogous (p = 0.86 and p = 0.31), but not in cohort III (p = 0.004). The hazard ratios for overall failure adjusted for age and sex were similar among the cohorts. Regarding cup aseptic loosening, the three cohorts had similar rates (p = 0.48) and similar adjusted hazard ratios. With periprosthetic hip infection as endpoint, the survival rates and the adjusted hazard ratios of the three cohorts were comparable (p = 0.68).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>3D printed cups provided similar 10-year outcomes compared to ultraporous cups and second-generation cups, with no additional risks of aseptic loosening and infection.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>IV (therapeutic study).</p><p><strong>Take home message: </strong>- 3D printed cups provided similar 10-year outcomes compared to ultraporous cups and second-generation cups. - There is no additional risks of aseptic loosening and infection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-024-05573-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-024-05573-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:目前还缺乏对全髋关节置换术(THA)中髋臼组件的不同材料和表面处理进行评估的比较研究。通过一项地区性关节成形术登记,对不同髋臼杯在原发性骨关节炎全髋关节置换术(THA)中的存活率和危险比进行了评估,采用的终点指标包括:(1)每次髋臼杯失败;(2)髋臼杯无菌性松动;(3)假体周围感染:纳入标准:居住患者,THA治疗原发性骨关节炎,Delta-on-Delta轴承,头部尺寸为32毫米和36毫米。只考虑植入最多的无骨水泥髋臼杯,并根据材料和表面处理分为三组:3D打印杯(I)、超多孔钽或钛涂层杯(II)、第二代杯(III)。研究共纳入 15737 个牙杯:第一组有 9,862 个种植杯(62.7%),第二组有 2,067 个种植体(13.1%),第三组有 3,808 个种植体(24.2%):结果:三个组群的 10 年存活率相当(P = 0.62)。在第一组和第二组中,杯型在组内的存活率类似(p = 0.86 和 p = 0.31),但在第三组中则不同(p = 0.004)。调整年龄和性别后,各组间总体失败的危险比相似。关于杯状无菌性松动,三个队列的发生率相似(p = 0.48),调整后的危险比也相似。以假体周围感染为终点,三个队列的存活率和调整后危险比相当(p = 0.68):结论:与超多孔髋臼杯和第二代髋臼杯相比,3D打印髋臼杯可提供相似的10年预后,且不会增加无菌性松动和感染的风险:IV级(治疗研究):- 3D打印髋臼杯的10年疗效与超微孔髋臼杯和第二代髋臼杯相似。- 无菌性松动和感染的风险没有增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Modern cementless acetabular cups in total hip arthroplasty performed for primary osteoarthritis: a comparative registry study.

Introduction: Comparative studies evaluating the different material and surface finishing of acetabular components in total hip arthroplasty (THA) are lacking. Using a regional arthroplasty registry, the survival rates and the hazard ratios of different cups in THA performed for primary osteoarthritis were assessed, using endpoints: (1) every cup failure, (2) cup aseptic loosening, (3) periprosthetic infection.

Materials and methods: The inclusion criteria were: residing patients, THA for primary osteoarthritis, Delta-on-Delta bearings, head sizes 32 mm and 36 mm. Only the most implanted cementless cups were considered and were grouped according to material and surface finishing into three cohorts: 3D printed cups (I), ultraporous tantalum or titanium- coated cups (II), second-generation cups (III). 15,737 cups were included in the study: 9,862 cups (62.7%) in cohort I, 2,067 implants (13.1%) in cohort II, 3,808 implants (24.2%) in cohort III.

Results: The three cohorts achieved comparable general 10-year survival rates (p = 0.62). In I and II cohorts, the survival rates of the cup types within cohorts were analogous (p = 0.86 and p = 0.31), but not in cohort III (p = 0.004). The hazard ratios for overall failure adjusted for age and sex were similar among the cohorts. Regarding cup aseptic loosening, the three cohorts had similar rates (p = 0.48) and similar adjusted hazard ratios. With periprosthetic hip infection as endpoint, the survival rates and the adjusted hazard ratios of the three cohorts were comparable (p = 0.68).

Conclusions: 3D printed cups provided similar 10-year outcomes compared to ultraporous cups and second-generation cups, with no additional risks of aseptic loosening and infection.

Level of evidence: IV (therapeutic study).

Take home message: - 3D printed cups provided similar 10-year outcomes compared to ultraporous cups and second-generation cups. - There is no additional risks of aseptic loosening and infection.

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
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
13.00%
发文量
424
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is a rich source of instruction and information for physicians in clinical practice and research in the extensive field of orthopaedics and traumatology. The journal publishes papers that deal with diseases and injuries of the musculoskeletal system from all fields and aspects of medicine. The journal is particularly interested in papers that satisfy the information needs of orthopaedic clinicians and practitioners. The journal places special emphasis on clinical relevance. "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is the official journal of the German Speaking Arthroscopy Association (AGA).
×
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