Cargando…

Does Powered Femoral Broaching Compromise Patient Safety in Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: During manual broaching (MB) in total hip arthroplasty (THA), off-axis forces delivered to the proximal femur and broach malalignment can lead to fractures and cortical perforations. Powered broaching (PB) is a novel alternative that delivers consistent impaction forces and reduces workl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Strait, Alexander V., Ho, Henry, Parks, Nancy L., Hamilton, William G., McAsey, Craig J., Sershon, Robert A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10514414/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37745960
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2023.101198
_version_ 1785108722379390976
author Strait, Alexander V.
Ho, Henry
Parks, Nancy L.
Hamilton, William G.
McAsey, Craig J.
Sershon, Robert A.
author_facet Strait, Alexander V.
Ho, Henry
Parks, Nancy L.
Hamilton, William G.
McAsey, Craig J.
Sershon, Robert A.
author_sort Strait, Alexander V.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: During manual broaching (MB) in total hip arthroplasty (THA), off-axis forces delivered to the proximal femur and broach malalignment can lead to fractures and cortical perforations. Powered broaching (PB) is a novel alternative that delivers consistent impaction forces and reduces workload. This is the first large-scale study to compare intraoperative and 90-day rates of periprosthetic femur fractures (PFFs) and perforations in THA performed using MB vs PB. METHODS: Our institutional database was reviewed for all patients undergoing primary cementless direct anterior THA from 2016 to 2021. Three surgeons performing 2048 THAs (MB = 800; PB = 1248) using the same stem design were included. PFFs and perforations within 90 days of the index procedure were compared. Differences in length of surgery and demographics were assessed. RESULTS: Calcar fractures occurred in <1% of patients (PB [0.96%, 12/1248] vs MB [0.25%, 2/800]; P = .06). Rates of trochanteric fractures did not differ (PB = 0.32% [4/1248] vs MB = 0.38% [3/800]; P = .84). Cortical perforations occurred in 0.24% (3/1248) of the PB cohort and in 0.75% (6/800) of the MB cohort (P = .09). No revisions due to aseptic loosening or PFF occurred within 120 days of surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Our single-center experience with powered femoral broaching in THA demonstrates PB is a safe and efficient means of performing direct anterior THA. Low rates (<1%) of PFF, perforation, and revision can be achieved. Given our positive experience with PB, all surgeon authors utilize PB nearly exclusively for elective primary direct anterior THA.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10514414
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105144142023-09-23 Does Powered Femoral Broaching Compromise Patient Safety in Total Hip Arthroplasty? Strait, Alexander V. Ho, Henry Parks, Nancy L. Hamilton, William G. McAsey, Craig J. Sershon, Robert A. Arthroplast Today Original Research BACKGROUND: During manual broaching (MB) in total hip arthroplasty (THA), off-axis forces delivered to the proximal femur and broach malalignment can lead to fractures and cortical perforations. Powered broaching (PB) is a novel alternative that delivers consistent impaction forces and reduces workload. This is the first large-scale study to compare intraoperative and 90-day rates of periprosthetic femur fractures (PFFs) and perforations in THA performed using MB vs PB. METHODS: Our institutional database was reviewed for all patients undergoing primary cementless direct anterior THA from 2016 to 2021. Three surgeons performing 2048 THAs (MB = 800; PB = 1248) using the same stem design were included. PFFs and perforations within 90 days of the index procedure were compared. Differences in length of surgery and demographics were assessed. RESULTS: Calcar fractures occurred in <1% of patients (PB [0.96%, 12/1248] vs MB [0.25%, 2/800]; P = .06). Rates of trochanteric fractures did not differ (PB = 0.32% [4/1248] vs MB = 0.38% [3/800]; P = .84). Cortical perforations occurred in 0.24% (3/1248) of the PB cohort and in 0.75% (6/800) of the MB cohort (P = .09). No revisions due to aseptic loosening or PFF occurred within 120 days of surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Our single-center experience with powered femoral broaching in THA demonstrates PB is a safe and efficient means of performing direct anterior THA. Low rates (<1%) of PFF, perforation, and revision can be achieved. Given our positive experience with PB, all surgeon authors utilize PB nearly exclusively for elective primary direct anterior THA. Elsevier 2023-09-19 /pmc/articles/PMC10514414/ /pubmed/37745960 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2023.101198 Text en © 2023 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Research
Strait, Alexander V.
Ho, Henry
Parks, Nancy L.
Hamilton, William G.
McAsey, Craig J.
Sershon, Robert A.
Does Powered Femoral Broaching Compromise Patient Safety in Total Hip Arthroplasty?
title Does Powered Femoral Broaching Compromise Patient Safety in Total Hip Arthroplasty?
title_full Does Powered Femoral Broaching Compromise Patient Safety in Total Hip Arthroplasty?
title_fullStr Does Powered Femoral Broaching Compromise Patient Safety in Total Hip Arthroplasty?
title_full_unstemmed Does Powered Femoral Broaching Compromise Patient Safety in Total Hip Arthroplasty?
title_short Does Powered Femoral Broaching Compromise Patient Safety in Total Hip Arthroplasty?
title_sort does powered femoral broaching compromise patient safety in total hip arthroplasty?
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10514414/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37745960
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2023.101198
work_keys_str_mv AT straitalexanderv doespoweredfemoralbroachingcompromisepatientsafetyintotalhiparthroplasty
AT hohenry doespoweredfemoralbroachingcompromisepatientsafetyintotalhiparthroplasty
AT parksnancyl doespoweredfemoralbroachingcompromisepatientsafetyintotalhiparthroplasty
AT hamiltonwilliamg doespoweredfemoralbroachingcompromisepatientsafetyintotalhiparthroplasty
AT mcaseycraigj doespoweredfemoralbroachingcompromisepatientsafetyintotalhiparthroplasty
AT sershonroberta doespoweredfemoralbroachingcompromisepatientsafetyintotalhiparthroplasty