Total hip arthroplasty after pelvic osteotomy: a meta-analysis.

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS Acta orthopaedica Belgica Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.52628/90.3.10758
S-W Huan, W-R Wu, S-J Peng, T-F Zhuang, N Liu
{"title":"Total hip arthroplasty after pelvic osteotomy: a meta-analysis.","authors":"S-W Huan, W-R Wu, S-J Peng, T-F Zhuang, N Liu","doi":"10.52628/90.3.10758","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Several studies suggested that total hip arthroplasty (THA) was more technical demanding following previous pelvic osteotomy (PO), resulting in poor outcomes compared with primary THA. However, the other studies regarding this topic had reported contradictory results. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to compare the clinical results and other parameters between total hip arthroplasty following pelvic osteotomy and primary total hip arthroplasty. We systematically searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO and Web of science from inception to September 2020. This study compared the outcomes between THA following previous PO and primary THA with respect to operative time, blood loss, Harris hip score (HHS), revision rates, complication rates, cup position, cup size, cup coverage and hip joint center. 14 studies with 3913 participants were included. The THA after PO group had longer operative time (MD, 13.8 mins; 95% CI, 4.73 to 22.87 mins; P=0.003), greater blood loss (MD, 82.21 ml; 95% CI, 27.94 to 136.48 ml; P=0.003), worse HHS (MD, -2.79 points; 95% CI, -4.08 to -1.50 points; P<0.00001), smaller acetabular anteversion angle (MD, -3.98°; 95% CI, -6.72 to -1.24°; P=0.004), larger cup size (MD, 1.52 mm; 95% CI, 0.75 to 2.28 mm; P=0.0001), more lateral (MD, 2.83 mm; 95% CI, 1.22 to 4.43 mm; P=0.0005) and superior (MD, 2.26 mm; 95% CI, 1.11 to 3.40 mm; P=0.0001) hip joint center. No statistically significant differences were demonstrated between the THA after PO group and primary THA group in revision rates, complication rates, acetabular abduction angle, cup coverage. THA after pelvic osteotomy was associated with inferior intraoperative outcomes, lower functional scores and worse inferior positioning of acetabular component compared with primary THA. Due to the alerted anatomical structure after PO, the findings of current study implicated that preoperative assessment such as computed tomography scan should be conducted in order to achieve satisfactory results.</p>","PeriodicalId":7018,"journal":{"name":"Acta orthopaedica Belgica","volume":"90 3","pages":"523-533"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta orthopaedica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52628/90.3.10758","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Several studies suggested that total hip arthroplasty (THA) was more technical demanding following previous pelvic osteotomy (PO), resulting in poor outcomes compared with primary THA. However, the other studies regarding this topic had reported contradictory results. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to compare the clinical results and other parameters between total hip arthroplasty following pelvic osteotomy and primary total hip arthroplasty. We systematically searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO and Web of science from inception to September 2020. This study compared the outcomes between THA following previous PO and primary THA with respect to operative time, blood loss, Harris hip score (HHS), revision rates, complication rates, cup position, cup size, cup coverage and hip joint center. 14 studies with 3913 participants were included. The THA after PO group had longer operative time (MD, 13.8 mins; 95% CI, 4.73 to 22.87 mins; P=0.003), greater blood loss (MD, 82.21 ml; 95% CI, 27.94 to 136.48 ml; P=0.003), worse HHS (MD, -2.79 points; 95% CI, -4.08 to -1.50 points; P<0.00001), smaller acetabular anteversion angle (MD, -3.98°; 95% CI, -6.72 to -1.24°; P=0.004), larger cup size (MD, 1.52 mm; 95% CI, 0.75 to 2.28 mm; P=0.0001), more lateral (MD, 2.83 mm; 95% CI, 1.22 to 4.43 mm; P=0.0005) and superior (MD, 2.26 mm; 95% CI, 1.11 to 3.40 mm; P=0.0001) hip joint center. No statistically significant differences were demonstrated between the THA after PO group and primary THA group in revision rates, complication rates, acetabular abduction angle, cup coverage. THA after pelvic osteotomy was associated with inferior intraoperative outcomes, lower functional scores and worse inferior positioning of acetabular component compared with primary THA. Due to the alerted anatomical structure after PO, the findings of current study implicated that preoperative assessment such as computed tomography scan should be conducted in order to achieve satisfactory results.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Acta orthopaedica Belgica
Acta orthopaedica Belgica 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
A comparative study of the role of carbon fibre reinforced polyetheretherketone and titanium intramedullary nails in patients with metastatic bone disease. Origin of proximal femur fracture classification and their namegivers. Percutaneous Intra-meniscal platelet-rich plasma injection for meniscal tears: A mid-term. Rectangular femoral stems can successfully accommodate the medullary canal in patients with severe hip dysplasia operated on with total hip arthroplasty and a shortening osteotomy: A morphometric study. The Clinical Efficacy of the Regeneten Bioinductive Implant in Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1