Hamlin B R, Rowland C, Morrey B F
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001 Nov;83(11):1700-5. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200111000-00013.
This study was undertaken to provide a basis for decision-making when a well-fixed cemented cup is encountered at the time of a revision of a femoral component of a total hip replacement. It may be beneficial to retain the cup in some instances and thus reduce morbidity, complications, blood loss, operative time, and cost.
All patients who had a revision of the femoral component and retention of an all-polyethylene acetabular component from 1971 to 1996 were identified. Three hundred and seventy-four patients with a total of 395 cemented total hip replacements fit the inclusion criteria. The gender, date of and age at the index surgery, type of acetabular implant, and time of and reason for the revision of the femoral component were reviewed. The time to subsequent cup revision or latest surveillance was noted. The average age (and standard deviation) was 66.5 +/- 11.8 years at the time of the femoral revision, which was performed at an average of 8.0 +/- 4.4 years after the primary arthroplasty. For the purposes of this study, the end point for survival of the acetabular component was cup revision for any reason.
At the time of the latest follow-up, at an average of nine years after the femoral revision and 17.3 years after the primary arthroplasty, 342 (86.6%) of the 395 cups remained in situ. Fifty-three cups (13.4%) in fifty-two patients had been revised, at an average of 10.0 +/- 5.7 years after the femoral revision and 16.7 +/- 5.3 years after the primary arthroplasty. The rate of survival of the retained acetabular components was 96.9% at five years, 89.3% at ten years, and 78.7% at fifteen years after the femoral revision and was 95.1% at fifteen years and 87.1% at twenty years after the primary arthroplasty. Increased age (p < 0.0001) and a shorter time-interval (less than 7.5 years) between the primary arthroplasty and the femoral revision (p = 0.05) were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of survival free of cup revision. Femoral head size, acetabular component design, gender, and primary diagnosis did not affect prosthetic survival in this sample of patients.
The likelihood of survival of the unrevised cup was associated with patient age and duration of implantation, with the age of the patient being the more dominant factor predicting failure of the acetabular component.
本研究旨在为全髋关节置换股骨部件翻修时遇到固定良好的骨水泥杯提供决策依据。在某些情况下保留髋臼杯可能有益,从而降低发病率、并发症、失血量、手术时间和成本。
确定1971年至1996年期间所有进行股骨部件翻修并保留全聚乙烯髋臼部件的患者。374例患者共395例骨水泥型全髋关节置换符合纳入标准。回顾了患者的性别、初次手术日期和年龄、髋臼植入物类型以及股骨部件翻修的时间和原因。记录了至后续髋臼杯翻修或最新随访的时间。股骨翻修时的平均年龄(及标准差)为66.5±11.8岁,初次关节置换术后平均8.0±4.4年进行股骨翻修。本研究中,髋臼部件存活的终点为因任何原因进行髋臼杯翻修。
在最新随访时,股骨翻修后平均9年、初次关节置换术后平均17.3年,395个髋臼杯中有342个(86.6%)仍在位。52例患者中的53个髋臼杯(13.4%)已翻修,股骨翻修后平均10.0±5.7年、初次关节置换术后平均16.7±5.3年。保留的髋臼部件在股骨翻修后5年的生存率为96.9%,10年为89.3%,15年为78.7%;在初次关节置换术后15年为95.1%,20年为87.1%。年龄增加(p<0.0001)以及初次关节置换与股骨翻修之间的时间间隔较短(小于7.5年)(p=0.05)与髋臼杯无需翻修存活的可能性增加显著相关。股骨头大小、髋臼部件设计、性别和原发诊断在本患者样本中不影响假体存活。
未翻修髋臼杯的存活可能性与患者年龄和植入时间有关,患者年龄是预测髋臼部件失败的更主要因素。