Vivek Singh, Jeremiah Thomas, Jerry Arraut, Christian T Oakley, Joshua C Rozell, Roy I Davidovitch, Ran Schwarzkopf
{"title":"采用双活动植入物的前后路全髋关节置换术取得了相似的结果。","authors":"Vivek Singh, Jeremiah Thomas, Jerry Arraut, Christian T Oakley, Joshua C Rozell, Roy I Davidovitch, Ran Schwarzkopf","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dual mobility (DM) bearings for total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been proposed to reduce the risk of instability in high-risk patients; however, their utility in primary THA remains relatively unexplored. No previous reports have described whether surgical approach influences outcomes associated with DM implant systems. This study aims to compare patient reported outcomes and post-operative groin pain between patients undergoing anterior approach versus posterior approach following primary THA with DM implants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent primary THA and received a DM implant between 2011-2021. Patients were stratified into two cohorts based on surgical approach (anterior vs. posterior approach). Primary outcomes included the presence of substantial postoperative groin pain as well as readmission and revision rates. Demographic differences were assessed using chi-square and independent sample t-tests. Outcomes were compared using multilinear and logistic regressions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 495 patients identified, 55 (11%) underwent THA via the anterior approach and 440 (89%) via the posterior approach. Surgical time (100.24 vs. 109.42 minutes, p=0.070), length of stay (2.19vs.2.67 days,p=0.072), discharge disposition (p=0.151), and significant postoperative groin pain (1.8%vs.0.7%,p=0.966) did not statistically differ between the cohorts. 90-day readmission (9.1%vs.7.7%,p=0.823) and revision rate (0.0%vs.3.0%,p=0.993) did not significantly differ as well. Specifically, readmission (p=0.993) and revision (p=0.998) for instability did not significantly differ between the cohorts. We found no statistical difference in HOOS, JR (p=0.425), VR-12 PCS (p=0.718), and VR-12 MCS (p=0.257) delta score improvement from preoperative to 1-year follow-up between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Comparable outcomes following implantation of DM constructs may be achievable irrespective of the surgical approach employed. The incidence of iliopsoas injections for groin pain did not significantly differ between anterior and posterior approaches. Future investigation is needed to determine whether surgical approach influences long-term outcomes in patients receiving DM implants. <b>Level of Evidence: III</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":35582,"journal":{"name":"The Iowa orthopaedic journal","volume":" ","pages":"137-143"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9210419/pdf/IOJ-42-01-137.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Similar Outcomes Achieved Between Anterior and Posterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty Using Dual Mobility Implants.\",\"authors\":\"Vivek Singh, Jeremiah Thomas, Jerry Arraut, Christian T Oakley, Joshua C Rozell, Roy I Davidovitch, Ran Schwarzkopf\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dual mobility (DM) bearings for total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been proposed to reduce the risk of instability in high-risk patients; however, their utility in primary THA remains relatively unexplored. No previous reports have described whether surgical approach influences outcomes associated with DM implant systems. This study aims to compare patient reported outcomes and post-operative groin pain between patients undergoing anterior approach versus posterior approach following primary THA with DM implants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent primary THA and received a DM implant between 2011-2021. Patients were stratified into two cohorts based on surgical approach (anterior vs. posterior approach). Primary outcomes included the presence of substantial postoperative groin pain as well as readmission and revision rates. Demographic differences were assessed using chi-square and independent sample t-tests. Outcomes were compared using multilinear and logistic regressions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 495 patients identified, 55 (11%) underwent THA via the anterior approach and 440 (89%) via the posterior approach. Surgical time (100.24 vs. 109.42 minutes, p=0.070), length of stay (2.19vs.2.67 days,p=0.072), discharge disposition (p=0.151), and significant postoperative groin pain (1.8%vs.0.7%,p=0.966) did not statistically differ between the cohorts. 90-day readmission (9.1%vs.7.7%,p=0.823) and revision rate (0.0%vs.3.0%,p=0.993) did not significantly differ as well. Specifically, readmission (p=0.993) and revision (p=0.998) for instability did not significantly differ between the cohorts. We found no statistical difference in HOOS, JR (p=0.425), VR-12 PCS (p=0.718), and VR-12 MCS (p=0.257) delta score improvement from preoperative to 1-year follow-up between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Comparable outcomes following implantation of DM constructs may be achievable irrespective of the surgical approach employed. The incidence of iliopsoas injections for groin pain did not significantly differ between anterior and posterior approaches. Future investigation is needed to determine whether surgical approach influences long-term outcomes in patients receiving DM implants. <b>Level of Evidence: III</b>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35582,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Iowa orthopaedic journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"137-143\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9210419/pdf/IOJ-42-01-137.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Iowa orthopaedic journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Iowa orthopaedic journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Similar Outcomes Achieved Between Anterior and Posterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty Using Dual Mobility Implants.
Background: Dual mobility (DM) bearings for total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been proposed to reduce the risk of instability in high-risk patients; however, their utility in primary THA remains relatively unexplored. No previous reports have described whether surgical approach influences outcomes associated with DM implant systems. This study aims to compare patient reported outcomes and post-operative groin pain between patients undergoing anterior approach versus posterior approach following primary THA with DM implants.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent primary THA and received a DM implant between 2011-2021. Patients were stratified into two cohorts based on surgical approach (anterior vs. posterior approach). Primary outcomes included the presence of substantial postoperative groin pain as well as readmission and revision rates. Demographic differences were assessed using chi-square and independent sample t-tests. Outcomes were compared using multilinear and logistic regressions.
Results: Of the 495 patients identified, 55 (11%) underwent THA via the anterior approach and 440 (89%) via the posterior approach. Surgical time (100.24 vs. 109.42 minutes, p=0.070), length of stay (2.19vs.2.67 days,p=0.072), discharge disposition (p=0.151), and significant postoperative groin pain (1.8%vs.0.7%,p=0.966) did not statistically differ between the cohorts. 90-day readmission (9.1%vs.7.7%,p=0.823) and revision rate (0.0%vs.3.0%,p=0.993) did not significantly differ as well. Specifically, readmission (p=0.993) and revision (p=0.998) for instability did not significantly differ between the cohorts. We found no statistical difference in HOOS, JR (p=0.425), VR-12 PCS (p=0.718), and VR-12 MCS (p=0.257) delta score improvement from preoperative to 1-year follow-up between the two groups.
Conclusion: Comparable outcomes following implantation of DM constructs may be achievable irrespective of the surgical approach employed. The incidence of iliopsoas injections for groin pain did not significantly differ between anterior and posterior approaches. Future investigation is needed to determine whether surgical approach influences long-term outcomes in patients receiving DM implants. Level of Evidence: III.
期刊介绍:
Any original article relevant to orthopaedic surgery, orthopaedic science or the teaching of either will be considered for publication in The Iowa Orthopaedic Journal. Articles will be enthusiastically received from alumni, visitors to the department, members of the Iowa Orthopaedic Society, residents, and friends of The University of Iowa Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation. The journal is published every June.