Harsh N Shah, Andrew A Barrett, Andrea K Finlay, Prerna Arora, Michael J Bellino, Julius A Bishop, Michael J Gardner, Matthew D Miller, James I Huddleston, William J Maloney, Stuart B Goodman, Derek F Amanatullah
{"title":"股骨颈骨折的关节置换术存在股骨外侧偏移恢复不足的风险。","authors":"Harsh N Shah, Andrew A Barrett, Andrea K Finlay, Prerna Arora, Michael J Bellino, Julius A Bishop, Michael J Gardner, Matthew D Miller, James I Huddleston, William J Maloney, Stuart B Goodman, Derek F Amanatullah","doi":"10.1177/11207000231169914","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of the study was to determine the restoration of hip biomechanics through lateral offset, leg length, and acetabular component position when comparing non-arthroplasty surgeons (NAS) to elective arthroplasty surgeons (EAS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>131 patients, with a femoral neck fracture treated with a THA by 7 EAS and 20 NAS, were retrospectively reviewed. 2 blinded observers measured leg-length discrepancy, femoral offset, and acetabular component position. Multivariate logistic regression models examined the association between the surgeon groups and restoration of lateral femoral, acetabular offset, leg length discrepancy, acetabular anteversion, acetabular position, and component size, while adjusting for surgical approach and spinal pathology.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>NAS under-restored 4.8 mm of lateral femoral offset (43.9 ± 8.7 mm) after THA when compared to the uninjured side (48.7 ± 7.1 mm, <i>p</i> <i>=</i> 0.044). NAS were at risk for under-restoring lateral femoral offset when compared to EAS (<i>p</i> <i>=</i> 0.040). There was no association between lateral acetabular offset, leg length, acetabular position, or component size and surgeon type.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Lateral femoral offset is at risk for under-restoration after THA for femoral neck fractures, when performed by surgeons that do not regularly perform elective THA. This indicates that lateral femoral offset is an under-appreciated contributor to hip instability when performing THA for a femoral neck fracture. Lateral femoral offset deserves as much attention and awareness as acetabular component position since a secondary analysis of our data reveal that preoperative templating and intraoperative imaging did not prevent under-restoration.</p>","PeriodicalId":12911,"journal":{"name":"HIP International","volume":" ","pages":"134-143"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Arthroplasty for femoral neck fractures is at risk for under restoration of lateral femoral offset.\",\"authors\":\"Harsh N Shah, Andrew A Barrett, Andrea K Finlay, Prerna Arora, Michael J Bellino, Julius A Bishop, Michael J Gardner, Matthew D Miller, James I Huddleston, William J Maloney, Stuart B Goodman, Derek F Amanatullah\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/11207000231169914\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of the study was to determine the restoration of hip biomechanics through lateral offset, leg length, and acetabular component position when comparing non-arthroplasty surgeons (NAS) to elective arthroplasty surgeons (EAS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>131 patients, with a femoral neck fracture treated with a THA by 7 EAS and 20 NAS, were retrospectively reviewed. 2 blinded observers measured leg-length discrepancy, femoral offset, and acetabular component position. Multivariate logistic regression models examined the association between the surgeon groups and restoration of lateral femoral, acetabular offset, leg length discrepancy, acetabular anteversion, acetabular position, and component size, while adjusting for surgical approach and spinal pathology.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>NAS under-restored 4.8 mm of lateral femoral offset (43.9 ± 8.7 mm) after THA when compared to the uninjured side (48.7 ± 7.1 mm, <i>p</i> <i>=</i> 0.044). NAS were at risk for under-restoring lateral femoral offset when compared to EAS (<i>p</i> <i>=</i> 0.040). There was no association between lateral acetabular offset, leg length, acetabular position, or component size and surgeon type.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Lateral femoral offset is at risk for under-restoration after THA for femoral neck fractures, when performed by surgeons that do not regularly perform elective THA. This indicates that lateral femoral offset is an under-appreciated contributor to hip instability when performing THA for a femoral neck fracture. Lateral femoral offset deserves as much attention and awareness as acetabular component position since a secondary analysis of our data reveal that preoperative templating and intraoperative imaging did not prevent under-restoration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12911,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HIP International\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"134-143\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HIP International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/11207000231169914\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/4/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HIP International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11207000231169914","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Arthroplasty for femoral neck fractures is at risk for under restoration of lateral femoral offset.
Purpose: The aim of the study was to determine the restoration of hip biomechanics through lateral offset, leg length, and acetabular component position when comparing non-arthroplasty surgeons (NAS) to elective arthroplasty surgeons (EAS).
Methods: 131 patients, with a femoral neck fracture treated with a THA by 7 EAS and 20 NAS, were retrospectively reviewed. 2 blinded observers measured leg-length discrepancy, femoral offset, and acetabular component position. Multivariate logistic regression models examined the association between the surgeon groups and restoration of lateral femoral, acetabular offset, leg length discrepancy, acetabular anteversion, acetabular position, and component size, while adjusting for surgical approach and spinal pathology.
Results: NAS under-restored 4.8 mm of lateral femoral offset (43.9 ± 8.7 mm) after THA when compared to the uninjured side (48.7 ± 7.1 mm, p= 0.044). NAS were at risk for under-restoring lateral femoral offset when compared to EAS (p= 0.040). There was no association between lateral acetabular offset, leg length, acetabular position, or component size and surgeon type.
Conclusions: Lateral femoral offset is at risk for under-restoration after THA for femoral neck fractures, when performed by surgeons that do not regularly perform elective THA. This indicates that lateral femoral offset is an under-appreciated contributor to hip instability when performing THA for a femoral neck fracture. Lateral femoral offset deserves as much attention and awareness as acetabular component position since a secondary analysis of our data reveal that preoperative templating and intraoperative imaging did not prevent under-restoration.
期刊介绍:
HIP International is the official journal of the European Hip Society. It is the only international, peer-reviewed, bi-monthly journal dedicated to diseases of the hip. HIP International considers contributions relating to hip surgery, traumatology of the hip, prosthetic surgery, biomechanics, and basic sciences relating to the hip. HIP International invites reviews from leading specialists with the aim of informing its readers of current evidence-based best practice.
The journal also publishes supplements containing proceedings of symposia, special meetings or articles of special educational merit.
HIP International is divided into six independent sections led by editors of the highest scientific merit. These sections are:
• Biomaterials
• Biomechanics
• Conservative Hip Surgery
• Paediatrics
• Primary and Revision Hip Arthroplasty
• Traumatology