Beom Seok Lee, Hong Seok Kim, O Sang Kwon, Young-Kyun Lee, Yong-Chan Ha, Kyung-Hoi Koo
{"title":"髋臼前突全髋关节置换术是否必须恢复髋关节中心?","authors":"Beom Seok Lee, Hong Seok Kim, O Sang Kwon, Young-Kyun Lee, Yong-Chan Ha, Kyung-Hoi Koo","doi":"10.5371/hp.2022.34.2.106","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>While initial fixation using a press-fit of the acetabular cup is critical for the durability of the component, restoration of the hip center is regarded as an attributable factor for implant survival and successful outcome. In protrusio acetabuli (PA), obtaining both restoration of the hip center and the press-fit of the acetabular cup simultaneously might be difficult during total hip arthroplasty (THA). We tested the hypothesis that use of a medialized cup, if press-fitted, will not result in compromise of the implant stability and outcome after cementless THA of PA.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 26 cementless THAs of 22 patients with PA were reviewed. During THA, press-fit of the cup was prioritized rather than hip center restoration. A press-fit was obtained in 24 hips. A press-fit could not be obtained in the two remaining hips; therefore, reinforcement acetabular components were used. Restoration of the hip center was achieved in 17 cups; 15 primary cups and two reinforcement components; it was medialized in nine cups. Implant stability and modified Harris hip score (mHHS) between the two groups were compared at a mean follow-up of 5.1 years (range, 2-16 years).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six cups; 17 restored cups and nine medialized press-fitted cups, remained stable at the latest follow-up. A similar final mHHS was observed between the restored group and the medialized group (83.6±12.1 vs 83.8±10.4, <i>P</i>=0.786).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Implant stability and favorable results were obtained by press-fitted cups, irrespective of hip center restoration. THA in PA patients showed promising clinical and radiological results.</p>","PeriodicalId":73239,"journal":{"name":"Hip & pelvis","volume":"34 2","pages":"106-114"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/b0/28/hp-34-106.PMC9204237.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is Restoration of Hip Center Mandatory for Total Hip Arthroplasty of Protrusio Acetabuli?\",\"authors\":\"Beom Seok Lee, Hong Seok Kim, O Sang Kwon, Young-Kyun Lee, Yong-Chan Ha, Kyung-Hoi Koo\",\"doi\":\"10.5371/hp.2022.34.2.106\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>While initial fixation using a press-fit of the acetabular cup is critical for the durability of the component, restoration of the hip center is regarded as an attributable factor for implant survival and successful outcome. In protrusio acetabuli (PA), obtaining both restoration of the hip center and the press-fit of the acetabular cup simultaneously might be difficult during total hip arthroplasty (THA). We tested the hypothesis that use of a medialized cup, if press-fitted, will not result in compromise of the implant stability and outcome after cementless THA of PA.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 26 cementless THAs of 22 patients with PA were reviewed. During THA, press-fit of the cup was prioritized rather than hip center restoration. A press-fit was obtained in 24 hips. A press-fit could not be obtained in the two remaining hips; therefore, reinforcement acetabular components were used. Restoration of the hip center was achieved in 17 cups; 15 primary cups and two reinforcement components; it was medialized in nine cups. Implant stability and modified Harris hip score (mHHS) between the two groups were compared at a mean follow-up of 5.1 years (range, 2-16 years).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six cups; 17 restored cups and nine medialized press-fitted cups, remained stable at the latest follow-up. A similar final mHHS was observed between the restored group and the medialized group (83.6±12.1 vs 83.8±10.4, <i>P</i>=0.786).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Implant stability and favorable results were obtained by press-fitted cups, irrespective of hip center restoration. THA in PA patients showed promising clinical and radiological results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73239,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hip & pelvis\",\"volume\":\"34 2\",\"pages\":\"106-114\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/b0/28/hp-34-106.PMC9204237.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hip & pelvis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5371/hp.2022.34.2.106\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/6/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hip & pelvis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5371/hp.2022.34.2.106","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:虽然使用髋臼杯压合的初始固定对假体的耐久性至关重要,但髋关节中心的恢复被认为是假体存活和成功结果的归因因素。在髋臼突出症(PA)中,在全髋关节置换术(THA)中同时获得髋中心的复位和髋臼杯的压合可能是困难的。我们验证了使用中位杯的假设,如果加压安装,不会导致假体稳定性和PA无骨水泥THA后的预后受损。材料与方法:回顾性分析22例PA患者26例无骨水泥tha。在全髋关节置换术中,优先考虑髋臼杯的压合,而不是髋关节中心的恢复。在24个髋部进行压合。其余两个髋部无法获得压合;因此,采用增强髋臼假体。17个髋臼实现髋中心的恢复;15个主杯和2个加固部件;它在9个杯子里。在平均5.1年(范围2-16年)的随访期间,比较两组的植入物稳定性和改良Harris髋关节评分(mHHS)。结果:26杯;17个修复杯和9个中等压合杯,在最近的随访中保持稳定。恢复组和介质组的最终mHHS相似(83.6±12.1 vs 83.8±10.4,P=0.786)。结论:不论髋关节中心是否复位,加压杯均可获得良好的植入物稳定性和效果。PA患者的THA表现出良好的临床和放射学结果。
Is Restoration of Hip Center Mandatory for Total Hip Arthroplasty of Protrusio Acetabuli?
Purpose: While initial fixation using a press-fit of the acetabular cup is critical for the durability of the component, restoration of the hip center is regarded as an attributable factor for implant survival and successful outcome. In protrusio acetabuli (PA), obtaining both restoration of the hip center and the press-fit of the acetabular cup simultaneously might be difficult during total hip arthroplasty (THA). We tested the hypothesis that use of a medialized cup, if press-fitted, will not result in compromise of the implant stability and outcome after cementless THA of PA.
Materials and methods: A total of 26 cementless THAs of 22 patients with PA were reviewed. During THA, press-fit of the cup was prioritized rather than hip center restoration. A press-fit was obtained in 24 hips. A press-fit could not be obtained in the two remaining hips; therefore, reinforcement acetabular components were used. Restoration of the hip center was achieved in 17 cups; 15 primary cups and two reinforcement components; it was medialized in nine cups. Implant stability and modified Harris hip score (mHHS) between the two groups were compared at a mean follow-up of 5.1 years (range, 2-16 years).
Results: Twenty-six cups; 17 restored cups and nine medialized press-fitted cups, remained stable at the latest follow-up. A similar final mHHS was observed between the restored group and the medialized group (83.6±12.1 vs 83.8±10.4, P=0.786).
Conclusion: Implant stability and favorable results were obtained by press-fitted cups, irrespective of hip center restoration. THA in PA patients showed promising clinical and radiological results.