Cargando…

Effect of femoral stem surface coating on clinical and radiographic outcomes of cementless primary total hip arthroplasty: a patient-matched retrospective study

PURPOSE: This study aims to determine whether changing the stem coating grants superior outcomes at a minimum follow-up of five years. METHODS: Retrospective review of a consecutive series of primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) operated by direct anterior approach between 01/01/2013 and 31/12/20...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Viamont-Guerra, Maria-Roxana, Ramos-Pascual, Sonia, Saffarini, Mo, Sales, José, Laude, Frederic
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9668389/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36385185
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00264-022-05629-1
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: This study aims to determine whether changing the stem coating grants superior outcomes at a minimum follow-up of five years. METHODS: Retrospective review of a consecutive series of primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) operated by direct anterior approach between 01/01/2013 and 31/12/2014. Two stems were compared, which were identical except for their surface coating; “the Original stem” was fully coated with hydroxyapatite (HA), while “the ProxCoat stem” was proximally coated with plasma-sprayed titanium and HA. Matching was performed. Clinical assessment included modified Harris hip score (mHHS), Oxford hip score (OHS), and forgotten joint score (FJS). Radiographic assessment evaluated alignment, subsidence, pedestal formation, heterotopic ossification, radiolucent lines ≥ 2 mm, spot welds, cortical hypertrophy, and osteolysis. RESULTS: 232 hips received the Original stem and 167 the ProxCoat stem, from which respectively five hips (2.2%) and no hips (0%) underwent revision. Matching identified two groups of 91 patients, with comparable patient demographics. At > five years follow-up, there were no differences in OHS (16 ± 6 vs 15 ± 5; p = 0.075) nor FJS (81 ± 26 vs 84 ± 22; p = 0.521), but there were differences in mHHS (89 ± 15 vs 92 ± 12; p = 0.042). There were no differences in alignment, subsidence, pedestal formation, heterotopic ossification, cortical hypertrophy, and osteolysis. There were differences in prevalence of proximal radiolucent lines (12% vs 0%; p < 0.001) and distal spot welds (24% vs 54%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: At a minimum follow-up of five years, this study on matched patients undergoing primary THA found that ProxCoat stems results in significantly fewer radiolucent lines, more spot welds, and less revisions than Original stems, thus suggesting better bone ingrowth.