Cargando…
Survival rates and reasons for revision of different stem designs in total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia: a regional registry study
INTRODUCTION: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) in dysplastic hips is challenging, and each specific implant used in this context has been associated with specific complications. A registry study was performed to query survival rates, hazard ratios, and reasons for revision of different stem designs in T...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8286209/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34275012 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s10195-021-00590-y |
_version_ | 1783723698999525376 |
---|---|
author | Di Martino, Alberto Castagnini, Francesco Stefanini, Niccolò Bordini, Barbara Geraci, Giuseppe Pilla, Federico Traina, Francesco Faldini, Cesare |
author_facet | Di Martino, Alberto Castagnini, Francesco Stefanini, Niccolò Bordini, Barbara Geraci, Giuseppe Pilla, Federico Traina, Francesco Faldini, Cesare |
author_sort | Di Martino, Alberto |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) in dysplastic hips is challenging, and each specific implant used in this context has been associated with specific complications. A registry study was performed to query survival rates, hazard ratios, and reasons for revision of different stem designs in THAs after developmental dysplasia of the hip. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A regional arthroplasty registry was inquired about cementless THAs performed for hip dysplasia from 2000 to 2017. Patients were stratified according to stem design in tapered (TAP; wedge and rectangular), anatomic (ANAT), and conical (CON), and divided on the basis of modularity (modular, M; nonmodular, NM). In total, 2039 TAP stems (548 M and 1491 NM), 1435 ANAT (1072 M and 363 NM), and 2287 CON (1020 M and 1267 NM) implants were included. Survival rates and reasons for revisions were compared. RESULTS: The groups were homogeneous for demographics, but not fully comparable in terms of implant features. NM-CON stems showed the highest risk of failure (significant) and a high risk for cup aseptic loosening (2.5%). The adjusted risk ratio showed that NM-CON was more prone to failure (HR versus NM-ANAT: 3.30; 95%CI 1.64–7.87; p = 0.0003). Revision rates for dislocations and stem aseptic loosening did not differ between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: NM-CON stems showed the highest risk of failure, especially high rates of cup aseptic loosening. NM-CON implants were not more prone to dislocations and stem aseptic loosening. Clinical comparative studies are required to investigate the causes of NM-CON failures, which may be due to abnormal acetabular morphology or imperfect restoration of the proximal biomechanics. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8286209 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82862092021-07-20 Survival rates and reasons for revision of different stem designs in total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia: a regional registry study Di Martino, Alberto Castagnini, Francesco Stefanini, Niccolò Bordini, Barbara Geraci, Giuseppe Pilla, Federico Traina, Francesco Faldini, Cesare J Orthop Traumatol Original Article INTRODUCTION: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) in dysplastic hips is challenging, and each specific implant used in this context has been associated with specific complications. A registry study was performed to query survival rates, hazard ratios, and reasons for revision of different stem designs in THAs after developmental dysplasia of the hip. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A regional arthroplasty registry was inquired about cementless THAs performed for hip dysplasia from 2000 to 2017. Patients were stratified according to stem design in tapered (TAP; wedge and rectangular), anatomic (ANAT), and conical (CON), and divided on the basis of modularity (modular, M; nonmodular, NM). In total, 2039 TAP stems (548 M and 1491 NM), 1435 ANAT (1072 M and 363 NM), and 2287 CON (1020 M and 1267 NM) implants were included. Survival rates and reasons for revisions were compared. RESULTS: The groups were homogeneous for demographics, but not fully comparable in terms of implant features. NM-CON stems showed the highest risk of failure (significant) and a high risk for cup aseptic loosening (2.5%). The adjusted risk ratio showed that NM-CON was more prone to failure (HR versus NM-ANAT: 3.30; 95%CI 1.64–7.87; p = 0.0003). Revision rates for dislocations and stem aseptic loosening did not differ between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: NM-CON stems showed the highest risk of failure, especially high rates of cup aseptic loosening. NM-CON implants were not more prone to dislocations and stem aseptic loosening. Clinical comparative studies are required to investigate the causes of NM-CON failures, which may be due to abnormal acetabular morphology or imperfect restoration of the proximal biomechanics. Springer International Publishing 2021-07-18 2021-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8286209/ /pubmed/34275012 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s10195-021-00590-y Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Di Martino, Alberto Castagnini, Francesco Stefanini, Niccolò Bordini, Barbara Geraci, Giuseppe Pilla, Federico Traina, Francesco Faldini, Cesare Survival rates and reasons for revision of different stem designs in total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia: a regional registry study |
title | Survival rates and reasons for revision of different stem designs in total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia: a regional registry study |
title_full | Survival rates and reasons for revision of different stem designs in total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia: a regional registry study |
title_fullStr | Survival rates and reasons for revision of different stem designs in total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia: a regional registry study |
title_full_unstemmed | Survival rates and reasons for revision of different stem designs in total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia: a regional registry study |
title_short | Survival rates and reasons for revision of different stem designs in total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia: a regional registry study |
title_sort | survival rates and reasons for revision of different stem designs in total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia: a regional registry study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8286209/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34275012 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s10195-021-00590-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dimartinoalberto survivalratesandreasonsforrevisionofdifferentstemdesignsintotalhiparthroplastyfordevelopmentaldysplasiaaregionalregistrystudy AT castagninifrancesco survivalratesandreasonsforrevisionofdifferentstemdesignsintotalhiparthroplastyfordevelopmentaldysplasiaaregionalregistrystudy AT stefanininiccolo survivalratesandreasonsforrevisionofdifferentstemdesignsintotalhiparthroplastyfordevelopmentaldysplasiaaregionalregistrystudy AT bordinibarbara survivalratesandreasonsforrevisionofdifferentstemdesignsintotalhiparthroplastyfordevelopmentaldysplasiaaregionalregistrystudy AT geracigiuseppe survivalratesandreasonsforrevisionofdifferentstemdesignsintotalhiparthroplastyfordevelopmentaldysplasiaaregionalregistrystudy AT pillafederico survivalratesandreasonsforrevisionofdifferentstemdesignsintotalhiparthroplastyfordevelopmentaldysplasiaaregionalregistrystudy AT trainafrancesco survivalratesandreasonsforrevisionofdifferentstemdesignsintotalhiparthroplastyfordevelopmentaldysplasiaaregionalregistrystudy AT faldinicesare survivalratesandreasonsforrevisionofdifferentstemdesignsintotalhiparthroplastyfordevelopmentaldysplasiaaregionalregistrystudy |