Implant Survival and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Total Hip Arthroplasty in Young Patients

Swarup, Ishaan; Lee, Yuo-yu; Chiu, Yu-Fen; Sutherland, Ryan; Shields, Marisa; Figgie, Mark P.

doi:10.1016/j.arth.2018.04.016

Cited by 48 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Gerade beim jungen Patienten reduziert die Verwendung von Keramikköpfen im Vergleich zu Metallköpfen die Revisionsrate signifikant, in einer Studie konnte ein Unterschied von 7 vs. 17 % nach 10 Jahren bei unter 35-Jährigen gezeigt werden [8]. Im Gegensatz zu dieser für den Hüftkopf auch in Registern eindeutigen Datenlage [1] ist die optimale Materialwahl des Inlays bei jungen adipösen Patienten noch unklar.…”

Section: Gleitpaarungunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Total Hip Arthroplasty in Young and Obese Patients

Matziolis

Brodt

2019

Z Orthop Unfall

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Special attention should be drawn on endoprosthetic hip replacement in young and obese patients because of an increased risk of perioperative complications and early implant failure. Gain of function and reduction of pain are not compromised in these patients, so that the indication criteria remain unchanged. Implant survival is reduced in very young patients and mainly influenced by the bearing materials. The risk of implant malalignment, specifically of the cup, can be minimized by an intraoperative X-ray control. The effect of bariatric surgery on perioperative complications remains unclear. But a preoperatively uncontrolled diabetes increases the risk of infection. Known specific risk factors of young and obese patients should be considered during the perioperative management and be included in the individual operation planning and informed consent.

show abstract

Section: Gleitpaarungunclassified

“…Known specific risk factors of young and obese patients should be considered during the perioperative management and be included in the individual operation planning and informed consent. [8]. Vergleichbare zufriedenstellende Ergebnisse konnten für unter 20-jährige Patienten mit einer Revisionsrate von 4 % nach 5 Jahren gezeigt werden [9].…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Total Hip Arthroplasty in Young and Obese Patients

Matziolis

Brodt

2019

Z Orthop Unfall

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More recent studies have almost all focused on the application of UTHA and have shown exceptional results, with 5-year survival rates approaching 90-100% [6,12]. However, these first-rate results have not been verified in other studies, e.g., Swarup reported a 10-year survival rate of 87% for UTHA [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although previous literature has reported implant survival and HHSs after primary CTHA or UTHA, they have either focused on complication rates or primary diagnoses [6,7]. Additionally, the reported results for implant survival and HHSs vary widely and are mainly attributable to differences in inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample sizes, and the length of follow-up [8,9]. Data on long-term implant survival and HHSs remain lacking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term survival of cemented versus uncemented total hip arthroplasty in the treatment of acute femoral neck fracture: A retrospective observational study with a mean 10-year follow-up

Han

Lin

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Despite the increased use of uncemented total hip arthroplasty (UTHA), there is little evidence of its superiority over cemented total hip arthroplasty (CTHA). The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the long-term survivorship and Harris Hip Scores (HHSs) of CTHA versus UTHA in the treatment of acute femoral neck fractures (FNFs). Methods Data involving 224 hips (CTHA, n= 112; UTHA, n=112) that underwent primary surgery in our medical institutions during 2005-2017 were analysed retrospectively. The primary endpoint was the risk of all-cause revision. The difference in the risk of all-cause revision between groups was assessed by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with a log-rank test and Cox regression analysis. Results The mean follow-up from surgery was 10 years (range, 3 - 13 years). Kaplan-Meier estimated that the 10-year implant survival was 98.1% (CI: 96.1–98.5) in the CTHA group and 96.2% (CI: 95.2–97.3) in the UTHA group (p = 0.030). The adjusted Cox regression analysis demonstrated a lower risk of revision in CTHA than in UTHA (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1-2.6, p = 0.000). At the final follow-up, significant differences were detected in HHS (85.10[±12.21] for CTHA vs. 79.11[±13.19] for UTHA). Conclusion This retrospective analysis demonstrates that CTHA has superior survival to UTHA, with a significantly reduced revision risk and higher functional outcome scores. Further follow-up is necessary to verify whether the CTHA advantage persists over time.

show abstract

“… 6 , 7 Additionally, the reported results of implant survival and HHSs vary widely; this variation is mainly attributable to differences in inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample sizes, and length of follow-up. 8 , 9 Data on long-term implant survival and HHSs are lacking. Furthermore, few reports have described implant survival, and most of these reports have been subject to a short duration of follow-up.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term survival after cemented versus uncemented total hip arthroplasty for treatment of acute femoral neck fracture: a retrospective study with a mean 10-year follow-up

Zhang

Chen

et al. 2020

J Int Med Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare the long-term survivorship and Harris hip scores (HHSs) between cemented total hip arthroplasty (CTHA) and uncemented total hip arthroplasty (UTHA) for treatment of acute femoral neck fractures (FNFs). Methods Data of 224 hips (CTHA, n = 112; UTHA, n = 112) that underwent primary surgery in our medical institution from 2005 to 2017 were retrospectively analysed. The primary endpoint was the risk of all-cause revision. The difference in the risk of all-cause revision between the two groups was assessed by Kaplan–Meier survival analysis with a log-rank test and Cox regression analysis. Results The mean postoperative follow-up was 10 years (range, 3–13 years). The Kaplan–Meier estimated 10-year implant survival rate was significantly higher in the CTHA than UTHA group (98.1% vs. 96.2%, respectively). The adjusted Cox regression analysis demonstrated a significantly lower risk of revision in the CTHA than UTHA group. At the final follow-up, the mean HHS was significantly higher in the CTHA than UTHA group (85.10 vs. 79.11, respectively). Conclusion This retrospective analysis demonstrated that CTHA provided higher survival, lower revision risk, and higher functional outcome scores than UTHA. Further follow-up is necessary to verify whether these advantages of CTHA persist over time.

show abstract

Implant Survival and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Total Hip Arthroplasty in Young Patients

Cited by 48 publications

References 45 publications

Total Hip Arthroplasty in Young and Obese Patients

Total Hip Arthroplasty in Young and Obese Patients

Long-term survival of cemented versus uncemented total hip arthroplasty in the treatment of acute femoral neck fracture: A retrospective observational study with a mean 10-year follow-up

Long-term survival after cemented versus uncemented total hip arthroplasty for treatment of acute femoral neck fracture: a retrospective study with a mean 10-year follow-up

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About