Long-term analysis of a series of cases of hip replacement depending on access and type of arthroplasty
https://doi.org/10.21886/2219-8075-2018-9-2-26-34
Abstract
Objective: to compare long-term results of total hip replacement according to approach and type of fi xation (cemented, uncemented). Materials and methods: the outcomes of 39 total hip replacement were estimated for the fi rst time aft er 5-6 years and for the second time aft er 11-15 years aft er the treatment. they have been compared by Bartel, Harris and WOMAC scores. Results: Kaplan-Meyer and descriptive statistics applied to get validated results. Conclusions: received data demonstrated durable positive functional results while Keggy’s approach has been used. Cemented fi xation and hybrid prostheses have longer survival rate than cementless devices.
About the Authors
G. Sh. Golubev
Rostov State Medical University.
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Georgy Sh. Golubev – PhD, Professor, N.A. Semashko City hospital No. 1, Rostov State Medical University.
Rostov-onDon.
V. N. Kabanov
N.A. Semashko City hospital No. 1.
Vladimir N. Kabanov – N.A. Semashko City hospital No. 1.
Rostov-on-Don.
References
1. Batygin TO, Zagorodnij GG, Skipenko NV. Total’noe jendoprotezirovanie tazobedrennogo sustava cementnoj fi ksacii. Istorija i sovremennost’. Moscow: OOO “Izdatel’stvo ”Litterra”, 2015. (in Russ.)
2. Kovalenko AN, Shubnyakov II, Tikhilov RM, Cherny AZ. Do new and more expensive implants provide better outcomes in total hip arthroplasty? Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia. 2015;(1):5-20. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.21823/2311-29052015-0-1-30-36
3. Singh JA. Epidemiology of knee and hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. Open Orthop. J. 2011;5:80–5. doi: 10.2174/1874325001105010080
4. Zagorodnij VA, Dirin NV. Aktual’nye voprosy prakticheskoj mediciny. // Sbornik nauch. trudov k 60-letiju KGB № 13. Moscow, 2000.
5. Volkov EE. Vyzhivaemost’ jendoprotezov tazobedrennyh sustavov i vozmozhnost’ ee povyshenija kompleksnoj konservativnoj reabilitaciej pacientov. // Vestnik vosstanovitel’noj mediciny. 2013;8(3):44–51. (in Russ.)
6. Skipenko NV, Zagorodnij TO. Total hip replacement with ceramics-ceramic friction pair during the period of observation from 5 to 10 years. Vrach-aspirant. 2013;(5):410– 418. (in Russ.)
7. Keggi KJ, Huo MH, Zatorski LE. Anterior approach to total hip replacement: surgical technique and clinical results of our fi rst one thousand cases using non-cemented prostheses. Yale J Biol Med. 1993;66(3):243–256.
8. Bojchev K, Konforti B, Chokanov B. Operativnaja ortopedija i travmatologija. Sofi ja; 1962. (in Russ.)
9. Movshovich IA. Operativnaja ortopedija. Moscow: Medicina; 1994. (in Russ.)
10. Golubev VG, Kabanov GSh, Golubev VN. Long Term Resuits of Total Hip Replacement from Diff erent Surgical Approaches. Vestnik travmatologii i ortopedii im. N.N. Priorova. 2008;(2):48–52. (in Russ.)
11. Harris WH Traumatic arthritis of the hip aft er dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. J Bone Jt. Surg. 1969;51A:737–755.
12. Wade DT, Collin C. Th e Barthel ADL Index: a standard measure of physical disability? Int. Disabil. Stud. 1988;10(2):64–67.
13. BAGkgE EV. Hamburger Einstufungsmanual zum BarthelIndex. Dimdi. 2002;(November).
14. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: Th e Barthel index. Md. State Med. J. 1965;14:61–65.
15. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: A health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J. Rheumatol. 1988;15(12):1833–1840.
16. Bellamy N, Wilson C, Hendrikz J, Whitehouse SL, Patel B, et al. Osteoarthritis Index delivered by mobile phone (m-WOMAC) is valid, reliable, and responsive. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2011;64(2):182–190. doi: 10.1016/j. jclinepi.2010.03.013
17. McConnell S, Kolopack P, Davis M. Th e Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC): a review of its utility and measurement properties. Arthritis Rheum. 2001;45(5):453–461.
18. Pascarel X, Dumont D, Nehme B, Dudreuilh JP, Honton JL. [Total hip arthroplasty using the Hardinge approach. Clinical results in 63 cases]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1989;75(2):98–103.
19. Myers GJC, Morgan D, O’Dwyer K. Exeter-Ogee total hip replacement using the Hardinge approach; the ten to twelve year results. HIP Int. 2008;18(1):35–39.
20. Aff atato S. Perspectives in Total Hip Arthroplasty. 2014.
21. Jolles BM, Bogoch ER. Posterior versus lateral surgical approach for total hip arthroplasty in adults with osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2006;3(3):CD003828.
22. Charnley J. Th e long-term results of low-friction a primary arthroplasty intervention. J. Bone Jt. Surg. [Br]. 1972;54– B:61–76.
23. Kennon R, Keggi J, Zatorski LE, Keggi KJ, Surgery J. Anterior Approach for Total Hip Arthroplasty: Beyond the Minimally Invasive Technique. 2006.
24. Abdulkarim A, Ellanti P, Motterlini N, Fahey T, O’Byrne JM. Cemented versus uncemented fi xation in total hip replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Orthop. Rev. (Pavia). 2013;34(5):e8. doi: 10.4081/or.2013.e8
25. Corten K., Bourne R., Charron K., Au K., Rorabeck C. Comparison of total hip arthroplasty performed with and without cement : a randomized trial. // J. Bone Jt. Surg. – 2011. - Vol. 84–A, no. 93. - P. 1335–8. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.00448
26. Pennington MW, Grieve R, Van Der Meulen JH. Lifetime cost eff ectiveness of diff erent brands of prosthesis used for total hip arthroplasty: A study using the NJR dataset. Bone Jt. J. 2015;97–B(6):762–770. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.97B6.34806
Review
For citations:
Golubev G.Sh., Kabanov V.N. Long-term analysis of a series of cases of hip replacement depending on access and type of arthroplasty. Medical Herald of the South of Russia. 2018;9(2):26-34. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21886/2219-8075-2018-9-2-26-34
Views:
1707
Email this article 