Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Bone Joint J ; 100-B(12): 1565-1571, 2018 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30499310

RESUMO

AIMS: The aim of this large registry-based study was to compare mid-term survival rates of cemented femoral stems of different designs used in hemiarthroplasty for a fracture of the femoral neck. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register (NHFR), 20 532 primary cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasties, which were undertaken in patients aged > 70 years with a femoral neck fracture between 2005 and 2016, were included. Polished tapered stems (n = 12 065) (Exeter and CPT), straight stems (n = 5545) (Charnley, Charnley Modular, and Spectron EF), and anatomical stems (n = 2922) (Lubinus SP2) were included. The survival of the implant with any reoperation as the endpoint was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and hazard ratios (HRs), and the different indications for reoperation were calculated using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: The one-year survival was 96.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 95.6 to 96.4) for the Exeter stem, 97.0% (95% CI 96.4 to 97.6) for the Lubinus SP2 stem, 97.6% (95% CI 97.0 to 98.2) for the Charnley stem, 98.1% (95% CI 97.3 to 98.9) for the Spectron EF stem, and 96.4% (95% CI 95.6 to 97.2) for the Charnley Modular stem, respectively. The hazard ratio for reoperation after one year was lower for Lubinus SP2 (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.97), Charnley (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.86), and Spectron EF stems (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.67) compared with the Exeter stem. Reoperation for periprosthetic fracture occurred almost exclusively after the use of polished tapered stems. CONCLUSION: We were able to confirm that implant survival after cemented hemiarthroplasty for a hip fracture is high. Differences in rates of reoperation seem to favour anatomical and straight stems compared with polished tapered stems, which had a higher risk of periprosthetic fracture.


Assuntos
Cimentos Ósseos , Hemiartroplastia/efeitos adversos , Fraturas do Quadril/cirurgia , Fraturas Periprotéticas/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgia , Sistema de Registros , Reoperação/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Seguimentos , Fraturas do Quadril/diagnóstico , Prótese de Quadril , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Noruega/epidemiologia , Fraturas Periprotéticas/epidemiologia , Fraturas Periprotéticas/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Desenho de Prótese , Fatores de Risco , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
J Bone Joint Surg Br ; 92(2): 196-201, 2010 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20130308

RESUMO

The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register has shown that several designs of uncemented femoral stems give good or excellent survivorship. The overall findings for uncemented total hip replacement however, have been disappointing because of poor results with the use of metal-backed acetabular components. In this study, we exclusively investigated the medium-to long-term performance of primary uncemented metal-backed acetabular components. A total of 9113 primary uncemented acetabular components were implanted in 7937 patients between 1987 and 2007. These were included in a prospective, population-based observational study. All the implants were modular and metal-backed with ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene liners. The femoral heads were made of stainless steel, cobalt-chrome (CoCr) alloy or alumina ceramic. In all, seven different designs of acetabular component were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier survivorship method and Cox regression analysis. Most acetabular components performed well up to seven years. When the endpoint was revision of the acetabular component because of aseptic loosening, the survival ranged between 87% and 100% at ten years. However, when the endpoint was revision for any reason, the survival estimates were 81% to 92% for the same implants at ten years. Aseptic loosening, wear, osteolysis and dislocation were the main reasons for the relatively poor overall performance of the acetabular components. Prostheses with alumina heads performed slightly better than those with stainless steel or CoCr alloy in subgroups. Whereas most acetabular components performed well at seven years, the survivorship declined with longer follow-up. Fixation was generally good. None of the metal-backed uncemented acetabular components with ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene liners in our study had satisfactory long-term results because of high rates of wear, osteolysis, aseptic loosening and dislocation.


Assuntos
Acetábulo/cirurgia , Artroplastia de Quadril/métodos , Prótese de Quadril , Idoso , Cimentos Ósseos , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Metais , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Polietileno , Desenho de Prótese , Falha de Prótese , Reoperação/estatística & dados numéricos , Análise de Sobrevida , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA