Cargando…

Early Rehabilitation and Periprosthetic Bone Environment after Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the periprosthetic bone environment could be affected by activity during the early rehabilitation period after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of activity during the early rehabilitation period. METHODS: This random clini...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Su, RiLiGe, Feng, Wei, Liu, Xu, Song, Ya, Xu, Zhe, Liu, Jian‐guo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8313161/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34075713
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.12984
_version_ 1783729294038532096
author Su, RiLiGe
Feng, Wei
Liu, Xu
Song, Ya
Xu, Zhe
Liu, Jian‐guo
author_facet Su, RiLiGe
Feng, Wei
Liu, Xu
Song, Ya
Xu, Zhe
Liu, Jian‐guo
author_sort Su, RiLiGe
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the periprosthetic bone environment could be affected by activity during the early rehabilitation period after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of activity during the early rehabilitation period. METHODS: This random clinical trial was conducted from January 2017 to July 2017. A total of 22 selected patients with advanced osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) who underwent primary unilateral THA were randomized (1:1) to a high activity level group (HA group) or a low activity level group (LA group). The HA group included nine men and two women, aged 53.18 ± 13.29 years. The LA group included five men and six women, aged 55.73 ± 11.73 years. The intervention was different postoperative daily walking distances guided by researchers: 1727.27 ± 564.08 m 0–2 months and 4272.73 ± 904.53 m 3–6 months postoperation for the HA group and 909.09 ± 583.87 m 0–2 months and 2409.09 ± 1068.13 m 3–6 months postoperation for LA group. The primary outcomes were radiographic evaluation (prosthetic stability and stress shielding based on the Engh scale) and bone mineral density (BMD) with a femoral prosthesis (individual and intergroup comparison using seven Gruen zones) at 6 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were set to confirm the safety and efficacy of activity during early rehabilitation, including day 1 erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), day 1 hypersensitive C‐reactive protein (CRP), length of hospital stay (LOS), and the Harris hip score (HHS) at discharge, 2 months postoperatively, and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Patients were followed up for 6 months after surgery. Regarding primary outcomes, all prostheses were assessed as stable, with bone in‐growth. There were no adverse events in any cases. The HA group had a higher incidence of stress shielding than the LA group, but there was no statistical significance (63.64% vs 18.18%; P > 0.05). The degree of stress shielding had a different distribution for the two groups (P < 0.05). In the HA group and the LA group, the median percentage difference of the BMD on the operated side was −25% and was −13% in Zone 1, −8% and − 1% in Zone 2, +1% and 3% in Zone 3, +6% and + 6% in Zone 4, −2% and +2% in Zone 5, −3% and −1% in Zone 6, and −24% and −12% in Zone 7 compared with the unoperated side. The BMD was significantly reduced in the medial proximal femur (Zone 1) and the lateral proximal femur (Zone 7) in both groups (P < 0.05). Furthermore, it was increased in the distal femur (Zone 4) in the HA group (P < 0.05). No difference was found in the BMD when comparing between groups. Regarding secondary outcomes, there was no statistical difference in day 1 ESR and day 1 CPR. The average LOS was similar in the HA and LA groups (7.00 days vs 7.18 days, P > 0.05). The HHS on day of discharge was higher in the HA group than in the LA group (60.73 ± 5.37 points vs 51.18 ± 8.05 points, P < 0.05); however, no statistically significant difference was found in postoperative the HHS at 2 months (81.73 ± 6.92 points vs 78.36 ± 9.18 points, P > 0.05) and 6 months (90.45 ± 5.24 points vs 91.55 ± 4.03 points, P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: High activity levels during early rehabilitation after primary THA accelerate the process of bone remodeling and aggravate stress shielding, with no significant benefits for functional recovery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8313161
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83131612021-07-30 Early Rehabilitation and Periprosthetic Bone Environment after Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial Su, RiLiGe Feng, Wei Liu, Xu Song, Ya Xu, Zhe Liu, Jian‐guo Orthop Surg Clinical Articles OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the periprosthetic bone environment could be affected by activity during the early rehabilitation period after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of activity during the early rehabilitation period. METHODS: This random clinical trial was conducted from January 2017 to July 2017. A total of 22 selected patients with advanced osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) who underwent primary unilateral THA were randomized (1:1) to a high activity level group (HA group) or a low activity level group (LA group). The HA group included nine men and two women, aged 53.18 ± 13.29 years. The LA group included five men and six women, aged 55.73 ± 11.73 years. The intervention was different postoperative daily walking distances guided by researchers: 1727.27 ± 564.08 m 0–2 months and 4272.73 ± 904.53 m 3–6 months postoperation for the HA group and 909.09 ± 583.87 m 0–2 months and 2409.09 ± 1068.13 m 3–6 months postoperation for LA group. The primary outcomes were radiographic evaluation (prosthetic stability and stress shielding based on the Engh scale) and bone mineral density (BMD) with a femoral prosthesis (individual and intergroup comparison using seven Gruen zones) at 6 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were set to confirm the safety and efficacy of activity during early rehabilitation, including day 1 erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), day 1 hypersensitive C‐reactive protein (CRP), length of hospital stay (LOS), and the Harris hip score (HHS) at discharge, 2 months postoperatively, and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Patients were followed up for 6 months after surgery. Regarding primary outcomes, all prostheses were assessed as stable, with bone in‐growth. There were no adverse events in any cases. The HA group had a higher incidence of stress shielding than the LA group, but there was no statistical significance (63.64% vs 18.18%; P > 0.05). The degree of stress shielding had a different distribution for the two groups (P < 0.05). In the HA group and the LA group, the median percentage difference of the BMD on the operated side was −25% and was −13% in Zone 1, −8% and − 1% in Zone 2, +1% and 3% in Zone 3, +6% and + 6% in Zone 4, −2% and +2% in Zone 5, −3% and −1% in Zone 6, and −24% and −12% in Zone 7 compared with the unoperated side. The BMD was significantly reduced in the medial proximal femur (Zone 1) and the lateral proximal femur (Zone 7) in both groups (P < 0.05). Furthermore, it was increased in the distal femur (Zone 4) in the HA group (P < 0.05). No difference was found in the BMD when comparing between groups. Regarding secondary outcomes, there was no statistical difference in day 1 ESR and day 1 CPR. The average LOS was similar in the HA and LA groups (7.00 days vs 7.18 days, P > 0.05). The HHS on day of discharge was higher in the HA group than in the LA group (60.73 ± 5.37 points vs 51.18 ± 8.05 points, P < 0.05); however, no statistically significant difference was found in postoperative the HHS at 2 months (81.73 ± 6.92 points vs 78.36 ± 9.18 points, P > 0.05) and 6 months (90.45 ± 5.24 points vs 91.55 ± 4.03 points, P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: High activity levels during early rehabilitation after primary THA accelerate the process of bone remodeling and aggravate stress shielding, with no significant benefits for functional recovery. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2021-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC8313161/ /pubmed/34075713 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.12984 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Orthopaedic Surgery published by Chinese Orthopaedic Association and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Clinical Articles
Su, RiLiGe
Feng, Wei
Liu, Xu
Song, Ya
Xu, Zhe
Liu, Jian‐guo
Early Rehabilitation and Periprosthetic Bone Environment after Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title Early Rehabilitation and Periprosthetic Bone Environment after Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full Early Rehabilitation and Periprosthetic Bone Environment after Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_fullStr Early Rehabilitation and Periprosthetic Bone Environment after Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full_unstemmed Early Rehabilitation and Periprosthetic Bone Environment after Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_short Early Rehabilitation and Periprosthetic Bone Environment after Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_sort early rehabilitation and periprosthetic bone environment after primary total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial
topic Clinical Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8313161/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34075713
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.12984
work_keys_str_mv AT surilige earlyrehabilitationandperiprostheticboneenvironmentafterprimarytotalhiparthroplastyarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT fengwei earlyrehabilitationandperiprostheticboneenvironmentafterprimarytotalhiparthroplastyarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT liuxu earlyrehabilitationandperiprostheticboneenvironmentafterprimarytotalhiparthroplastyarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT songya earlyrehabilitationandperiprostheticboneenvironmentafterprimarytotalhiparthroplastyarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT xuzhe earlyrehabilitationandperiprostheticboneenvironmentafterprimarytotalhiparthroplastyarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT liujianguo earlyrehabilitationandperiprostheticboneenvironmentafterprimarytotalhiparthroplastyarandomizedcontrolledtrial