Abstract:Background: Prior studies have compared the posterior capsule repair group in primary total hip arthroplasty by posterior approach with the control group without posterior capsule repair suggesting that the posterior capsule repair group had better clinical outcomes. However, it is still a controversy which treatment is more helpful for hip diseases. The purpose of our article is to obtain the postoperative outcomes between the 2 procedures. Methods: We performed a systematic search by browsing the MEDLINE, EM… Show more
“… Figure 4 Sketch summarizing consensus findings on the distribution of innervation patterns of the accessory obturator, femoral, obturator, nerve to quadratus femoris, sciatic and superior gluteal nerves. Sketch adapted from Tomlinson et al (2020) 19 . The top row of sketches represents the anterior capsule and the bottom row shows the posterior capsule.…”
Detailed understanding of the innervation of the hip capsule (HC) helps inform surgeons’ and anaesthetists’ clinical practice. Post-interventional pain following radiofrequency nerve ablation (RFA) and dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) remain poorly understood, highlighting the need for more knowledge on the topic. This systematic review and meta-analysis focuses on gross anatomical studies investigating HC innervation. The main outcomes were defined as the prevalence, course, density and distribution of the nerves innervating the HC and changes according to demographic variables. HC innervation is highly variable; its primary nerve supply seems to be from the nerve to quadratus femoris and obturator nerve. Many articular branches originated from muscular branches of the lumbosacral plexus. It remains unclear whether demographic or anthropometric variables may help predict potential differences in HC innervation. Consequently, primary targets for RFA should be the anterior inferomedial aspect of the HC. For THA performed on non-risk patients, the posterior approach with capsular repair appears to be most appropriate with the lowest risk of articular nerve damage. Care should also be taken to avoid damaging vessels and muscles of the hip joint. Further investigation is required to form a coherent map of HC innervation, utilizing combined gross and histological investigation.
“… Figure 4 Sketch summarizing consensus findings on the distribution of innervation patterns of the accessory obturator, femoral, obturator, nerve to quadratus femoris, sciatic and superior gluteal nerves. Sketch adapted from Tomlinson et al (2020) 19 . The top row of sketches represents the anterior capsule and the bottom row shows the posterior capsule.…”
Detailed understanding of the innervation of the hip capsule (HC) helps inform surgeons’ and anaesthetists’ clinical practice. Post-interventional pain following radiofrequency nerve ablation (RFA) and dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) remain poorly understood, highlighting the need for more knowledge on the topic. This systematic review and meta-analysis focuses on gross anatomical studies investigating HC innervation. The main outcomes were defined as the prevalence, course, density and distribution of the nerves innervating the HC and changes according to demographic variables. HC innervation is highly variable; its primary nerve supply seems to be from the nerve to quadratus femoris and obturator nerve. Many articular branches originated from muscular branches of the lumbosacral plexus. It remains unclear whether demographic or anthropometric variables may help predict potential differences in HC innervation. Consequently, primary targets for RFA should be the anterior inferomedial aspect of the HC. For THA performed on non-risk patients, the posterior approach with capsular repair appears to be most appropriate with the lowest risk of articular nerve damage. Care should also be taken to avoid damaging vessels and muscles of the hip joint. Further investigation is required to form a coherent map of HC innervation, utilizing combined gross and histological investigation.
“…Der größte Nachteil ist die dauerhafte Schädigung der AuĂźenrotatoren, was das Luxationsrisiko erhöht [ 13 , 50 ]. Die Rekonstruktion der posterioren Kapsel und der AuĂźenrotatoren während der Primärimplantation verringert das Luxationsrisiko, ist aber bei Revisionseingriffen nicht immer durchfĂĽhrbar [ 58 ].…”
Zusammenfassung
Hintergrund und Planung
Die Schaftrevision stellt in ihrer Operationsvorbereitung und technischen Durchführung eine große Herausforderung dar. Die Ergebnisse sind maßgeblich von der Defektsituation, der Qualität der Implantatentfernung sowie der Wahl des Revisionsimplantates abhängig. Patientenspezifische Faktoren wie das Alter, die Komorbiditäten, die Knochenqualität oder auch die Lokalisation des Zementes haben entscheidenden Einfluss auf die operative Strategie. Eine entsprechende präoperative Vorbereitung inklusive des Vorhandenseins von notwendigen Spezialinstrumenten, die essenziell für die schonende Implantatentfernung sind, ist unabdingbar, um das bestmögliche Ergebnis zu erzielen.
Therapie
Die knochenschonende Explantation stellt gerade bei festsitzenden Schäften und Zementresten, die ggf. weit über den Isthmus reichen können, eine besondere Herausforderung dar. In solchen Situationen sollte ein transfemoraler Zugang erwogen werden. Die zementfreie Reimplantation unter Verwendung von modularen oder nichtmodularen Titanschäften ist für die meisten Revisionen die derzeit bevorzugte Therapie der Wahl. Bei älteren Patienten mit niedrigem Leistungsanspruch oder schlechter Knochenqualität bleibt die zementierte Versorgung eine gute alternative Therapieoption.
“…Dislocation is one of the most common complications after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), with an incidence of 0.2–10% [ 1 , 2 ]. More than 60% of these patients with dislocations suffered multiple occurrences, and more than half required revision surgery [ 3 ].…”
Background
Dislocation is a common complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to compare the outcomes of mesh reconstruction versus conventional capsular repair in maintaining capsular integrity and preventing dislocation after THA.
Methods
This was a prospective, randomized controlled study of consecutive patients. A total of 124 high-dislocation-risk THAs were identified and randomized into two groups, one using mesh reconstruction and the other using the conventional capsular repair method. Perioperative data and radiological data were collected. Patients were followed up regularly. The main indices were the capsular integrity assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and hip dislocation rate. The secondary indices included the Harris hip score (HHS), complications, and satisfaction.
Results
A total of 106 patients completed the follow-up and the average follow-up times were 19 ± 3.1 and 18 ± 3.3 months. The operation time of the mesh group was longer than that of the conventional group (P < 0.001). There were minor differences in acetabular anteversion and abduction angle, and the other data showed no differences. MRI results indicated that the success rate of capsular repair was higher in the mesh group (50 hips, 98%) than in the conventional group (37 hips, 67%) (P < 0.001), and the others failed the repair. Three dislocations occurred in the conventional group, while none occurred in the mesh group. The preoperative HHS (30 points) and postoperative HHS (82 points) of the mesh group were similar to those (35 points, 83 points) of the conventional group (P = 0.164, P = 0.328). Satisfaction had no difference (P = 0.532).
Conclusions
Compared to conventional repair, mesh reconstruction can effectively maintain capsular integrity and decrease dislocation risk after THA without increasing complications.
Level of evidence: Therapeutic study, Level IA.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
