Reduced survival for uncemented compared to cemented total hip arthroplasty after operatively treated acetabular fractures

Clarke-Jenssen, John; Westberg, Marianne; Røise, Olav; Storeggen, S. A. Ø.; Bere, Tone; Silberg, Inger Elisabeth; Madsen, Jan Erik

doi:10.1016/j.injury.2017.08.071

Cited by 12 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(32 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the current report, we observed a reduced survival for UTHA, with a 10-year survival approaching 96.2%. However, a 10-year survival of 57% was reported in a previous study involving 10 cases treated with secondary UTHA [7]. In addition, a 10-year survival of 77% occurred in 20 UTHA cases [17].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Signs of cemented or uncemented stem loosening were evaluated by 2 co-authors in accordance with previous reports [13,14], and the assessment of the cups was performed using Charnley zones [15]. Revision was defined as the removal or exchange of any component [7]. Failure was defined as revision of the primary CTHA or UTHA for any cause.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Europe, the 10-year survival for CTHA was higher than that for UTHA [22,23]. The superiority of hip stability after CTHA over that after UTHA has been reported due to the low stress transfer and good fusion of the cement-bone interface [7,24]. The between-component mechanical wear introduced by edge loading is lower in CTHA than in UTHA [24].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although previous literature has reported implant survival and HHSs after primary CTHA or UTHA, they have either focused on complication rates or primary diagnoses [6,7]. Additionally, the reported results for implant survival and HHSs vary widely and are mainly attributable to differences in inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample sizes, and the length of follow-up [8,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Long-term survival of cemented versus uncemented total hip arthroplasty in the treatment of acute femoral neck fracture: A retrospective observational study with a mean 10-year follow-up

Han

Lin

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Despite the increased use of uncemented total hip arthroplasty (UTHA), there is little evidence of its superiority over cemented total hip arthroplasty (CTHA). The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the long-term survivorship and Harris Hip Scores (HHSs) of CTHA versus UTHA in the treatment of acute femoral neck fractures (FNFs). Methods Data involving 224 hips (CTHA, n= 112; UTHA, n=112) that underwent primary surgery in our medical institutions during 2005-2017 were analysed retrospectively. The primary endpoint was the risk of all-cause revision. The difference in the risk of all-cause revision between groups was assessed by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with a log-rank test and Cox regression analysis. Results The mean follow-up from surgery was 10 years (range, 3 - 13 years). Kaplan-Meier estimated that the 10-year implant survival was 98.1% (CI: 96.1–98.5) in the CTHA group and 96.2% (CI: 95.2–97.3) in the UTHA group (p = 0.030). The adjusted Cox regression analysis demonstrated a lower risk of revision in CTHA than in UTHA (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1-2.6, p = 0.000). At the final follow-up, significant differences were detected in HHS (85.10[±12.21] for CTHA vs. 79.11[±13.19] for UTHA). Conclusion This retrospective analysis demonstrates that CTHA has superior survival to UTHA, with a significantly reduced revision risk and higher functional outcome scores. Further follow-up is necessary to verify whether the CTHA advantage persists over time.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Long-term survival of cemented versus uncemented total hip arthroplasty in the treatment of acute femoral neck fracture: A retrospective observational study with a mean 10-year follow-up

Han

Lin

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although previous reports have described implant survival and HHSs after primary CTHA or UTHA, they have either focused on complication rates or primary diagnoses. 6 , 7 Additionally, the reported results of implant survival and HHSs vary widely; this variation is mainly attributable to differences in inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample sizes, and length of follow-up. 8 , 9 Data on long-term implant survival and HHSs are lacking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term survival after cemented versus uncemented total hip arthroplasty for treatment of acute femoral neck fracture: a retrospective study with a mean 10-year follow-up

Zhang

Chen

et al. 2020

J Int Med Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare the long-term survivorship and Harris hip scores (HHSs) between cemented total hip arthroplasty (CTHA) and uncemented total hip arthroplasty (UTHA) for treatment of acute femoral neck fractures (FNFs). Methods Data of 224 hips (CTHA, n = 112; UTHA, n = 112) that underwent primary surgery in our medical institution from 2005 to 2017 were retrospectively analysed. The primary endpoint was the risk of all-cause revision. The difference in the risk of all-cause revision between the two groups was assessed by Kaplan–Meier survival analysis with a log-rank test and Cox regression analysis. Results The mean postoperative follow-up was 10 years (range, 3–13 years). The Kaplan–Meier estimated 10-year implant survival rate was significantly higher in the CTHA than UTHA group (98.1% vs. 96.2%, respectively). The adjusted Cox regression analysis demonstrated a significantly lower risk of revision in the CTHA than UTHA group. At the final follow-up, the mean HHS was significantly higher in the CTHA than UTHA group (85.10 vs. 79.11, respectively). Conclusion This retrospective analysis demonstrated that CTHA provided higher survival, lower revision risk, and higher functional outcome scores than UTHA. Further follow-up is necessary to verify whether these advantages of CTHA persist over time.

show abstract

Total Hip Arthroplasty in the Setting of Post-Traumatic Arthritis Following Acetabular Fracture: A Systematic Review

O’Driscoll¹,

Davey²,

Hughes³

et al. 2023

Arthroplasty Today

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reduced survival for uncemented compared to cemented total hip arthroplasty after operatively treated acetabular fractures

Cited by 12 publications

References 29 publications

Long-term survival of cemented versus uncemented total hip arthroplasty in the treatment of acute femoral neck fracture: A retrospective observational study with a mean 10-year follow-up

Long-term survival of cemented versus uncemented total hip arthroplasty in the treatment of acute femoral neck fracture: A retrospective observational study with a mean 10-year follow-up

Long-term survival after cemented versus uncemented total hip arthroplasty for treatment of acute femoral neck fracture: a retrospective study with a mean 10-year follow-up

Total Hip Arthroplasty in the Setting of Post-Traumatic Arthritis Following Acetabular Fracture: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About