固定方法对股骨头缺损的影响:对255名首次接受翻修全髋关节置换术的患者骨干松动情况的回顾性评估。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS International Orthopaedics Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1007/s00264-024-06230-4
Nele Wagener, Matthias Pumberger, Sebastian Hardt
{"title":"固定方法对股骨头缺损的影响:对255名首次接受翻修全髋关节置换术的患者骨干松动情况的回顾性评估。","authors":"Nele Wagener, Matthias Pumberger, Sebastian Hardt","doi":"10.1007/s00264-024-06230-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Implant loosening represent the most common indication for stem revision in hip revision arthroplasty. This study compares femoral bone loss and the risk of initial revisions between cemented and uncemented loosened primary stems, investigating the impact of fixation method at primary implantation on femoral bone defects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study reviewed 255 patients who underwent their first revision for stem loosening from 2010 to 2022, receiving either cemented or uncemented stem implants. Femoral bone loss was preoperatively measured using the Paprosky classification through radiographic evaluations. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated the survival probability of the original stem, and the hazard ratio assessed the relative risk of revision for uncemented versus cemented stems in the first postoperative year and the following two to ten years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cemented stems showed a higher prevalence of significant bone loss (type 3b and 4 defects: 32.39% vs. 2.72%, p < .001) compared to uncemented stems, which more commonly had type 1 and 2 defects (82.07% vs. 47.89%, p < .001). In our analysis of revision cases, primary uncemented stems demonstrated a 20% lower incidence of stem loosening in the first year post-implantation compared to cemented stems (HR 0.8; 95%-CI 0.3-2.0). However, the incidence in uncemented stems increased by 20% during the subsequent years two to ten (HR 1.2; 95%-CI 0.7-1.8). Septic loosening was more common in cemented stems (28.17% vs. 10.87% in uncemented stems, p = .001). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated a modestly longer revision-free period for cemented stems within the first ten years post-implantation (p < .022).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>During first-time revision, cemented stems show significantly larger femoral bone defects than uncemented stems. Septic stem loosening occurred 17.30% more in cemented stems.</p>","PeriodicalId":14450,"journal":{"name":"International Orthopaedics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11347471/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of fixation method on femoral bone loss: a retrospective evaluation of stem loosening in first-time revision total hip arthroplasty among two hundred and fifty five patients.\",\"authors\":\"Nele Wagener, Matthias Pumberger, Sebastian Hardt\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00264-024-06230-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Implant loosening represent the most common indication for stem revision in hip revision arthroplasty. This study compares femoral bone loss and the risk of initial revisions between cemented and uncemented loosened primary stems, investigating the impact of fixation method at primary implantation on femoral bone defects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study reviewed 255 patients who underwent their first revision for stem loosening from 2010 to 2022, receiving either cemented or uncemented stem implants. Femoral bone loss was preoperatively measured using the Paprosky classification through radiographic evaluations. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated the survival probability of the original stem, and the hazard ratio assessed the relative risk of revision for uncemented versus cemented stems in the first postoperative year and the following two to ten years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cemented stems showed a higher prevalence of significant bone loss (type 3b and 4 defects: 32.39% vs. 2.72%, p < .001) compared to uncemented stems, which more commonly had type 1 and 2 defects (82.07% vs. 47.89%, p < .001). In our analysis of revision cases, primary uncemented stems demonstrated a 20% lower incidence of stem loosening in the first year post-implantation compared to cemented stems (HR 0.8; 95%-CI 0.3-2.0). However, the incidence in uncemented stems increased by 20% during the subsequent years two to ten (HR 1.2; 95%-CI 0.7-1.8). Septic loosening was more common in cemented stems (28.17% vs. 10.87% in uncemented stems, p = .001). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated a modestly longer revision-free period for cemented stems within the first ten years post-implantation (p < .022).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>During first-time revision, cemented stems show significantly larger femoral bone defects than uncemented stems. Septic stem loosening occurred 17.30% more in cemented stems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14450,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Orthopaedics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11347471/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Orthopaedics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-024-06230-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-024-06230-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:植入物松动是髋关节翻修手术中最常见的柄翻修适应症。本研究比较了骨水泥和非骨水泥松动主茎的股骨头缺损和首次翻修的风险,研究了初次植入时的固定方法对股骨头缺损的影响:这项回顾性研究回顾了2010年至2022年期间因茎突松动而进行首次翻修的255名患者,他们接受了骨水泥或非骨水泥茎突植入物。术前通过放射学评估采用帕普洛斯基分类法测量股骨头缺损情况。卡普兰-梅耶尔分析估算了原始骨干的存活概率,而危险比则评估了术后第一年和随后两到十年内非粘结与粘结骨干翻修的相对风险:结果显示:骨水泥柄出现明显骨质流失的几率更高(3b和4型缺损:32.39%对2.2%):32.39% vs. 2.72%, p 结论:在首次翻修期间,骨水泥柄显示的股骨头缺损明显大于非骨水泥柄。骨水泥柄发生化脓性柄松动的几率比非骨水泥柄高17.30%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Impact of fixation method on femoral bone loss: a retrospective evaluation of stem loosening in first-time revision total hip arthroplasty among two hundred and fifty five patients.

Purpose: Implant loosening represent the most common indication for stem revision in hip revision arthroplasty. This study compares femoral bone loss and the risk of initial revisions between cemented and uncemented loosened primary stems, investigating the impact of fixation method at primary implantation on femoral bone defects.

Methods: This retrospective study reviewed 255 patients who underwent their first revision for stem loosening from 2010 to 2022, receiving either cemented or uncemented stem implants. Femoral bone loss was preoperatively measured using the Paprosky classification through radiographic evaluations. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated the survival probability of the original stem, and the hazard ratio assessed the relative risk of revision for uncemented versus cemented stems in the first postoperative year and the following two to ten years.

Results: Cemented stems showed a higher prevalence of significant bone loss (type 3b and 4 defects: 32.39% vs. 2.72%, p < .001) compared to uncemented stems, which more commonly had type 1 and 2 defects (82.07% vs. 47.89%, p < .001). In our analysis of revision cases, primary uncemented stems demonstrated a 20% lower incidence of stem loosening in the first year post-implantation compared to cemented stems (HR 0.8; 95%-CI 0.3-2.0). However, the incidence in uncemented stems increased by 20% during the subsequent years two to ten (HR 1.2; 95%-CI 0.7-1.8). Septic loosening was more common in cemented stems (28.17% vs. 10.87% in uncemented stems, p = .001). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated a modestly longer revision-free period for cemented stems within the first ten years post-implantation (p < .022).

Conclusion: During first-time revision, cemented stems show significantly larger femoral bone defects than uncemented stems. Septic stem loosening occurred 17.30% more in cemented stems.

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
International Orthopaedics
International Orthopaedics 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.40%
发文量
360
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: International Orthopaedics, the Official Journal of the Société Internationale de Chirurgie Orthopédique et de Traumatologie (SICOT) , publishes original papers from all over the world. The articles deal with clinical orthopaedic surgery or basic research directly connected with orthopaedic surgery. International Orthopaedics will also link all the members of SICOT by means of an insert that will be concerned with SICOT matters. Finally, it is expected that news and information regarding all aspects of orthopaedic surgery, including meetings, panels, instructional courses, etc. will be brought to the attention of the readers. Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been approved by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted. Reports of animal experiments must state that the "Principles of laboratory animal care" (NIH publication No. 85-23, revised 1985) were followed, as well as specific national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals) where applicable. The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfil the above-mentioned requirements.
期刊最新文献
Medium- to long-term clinical efficacy of total hip arthroplasty with structural bone grafting for dysplasia of the hip. Clinical outcomes of primary total knee arthroplasty in non-syphilitic neuroarthropathy of the knee. "Is every revision the same?" definition of complexity in knee revision surgery. Is the occurrence of extra-articular calcaneal fractures of the joint depression type related to osteoporosis and aging? Innovative approaches in the treatment of chronic plantar fasciitis: comparison of pulsed radiofrequency ablation and surgical intervention.
×
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