Suppr超能文献

在初次非骨水泥髋臼假体翻修中,孤立髋臼衬垫置换与全髋臼组件翻修的比较:一项来自挪威关节置换登记处的1649例翻修研究

Isolated acetabular liner exchange compared with complete acetabular component revision in revision of primary uncemented acetabular components: a study of 1649 revisions from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.

作者信息

Lie S A, Hallan G, Furnes O, Havelin L I, Engesaeter L B

机构信息

Department of Health University Research Bergen, N-5015 Bergen, Norway.

出版信息

J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007 May;89(5):591-4. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B5.18623.

Abstract

We analysed the results of different strategies in the revision of primary uncemented acetabular components reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. The aim was to compare the risk of further acetabular revision after isolated liner exchange and complete component revision. The results of exchanging well-fixed components were also compared with those of exchanging loose acetabular components. The period studied was between September 1987 and April 2005. The following groups were compared: group 1, exchange of liner only in 318 hips; group 2, exchange of well-fixed components in 398; and group 3, exchange of loose components in 933. We found that the risk of a further cup revision was lower after revision of well-fixed components (relative risk from a Cox model (RR) = 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.37% to 0.87%) and loose components (RR = 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.39% to 0.80%), compared with exchange of the liner in isolation. The most frequent reason for a further acetabular revision was dislocation, accounting for 61 (28%) of the re-revisions. Other reasons for further revision included pain in 27 (12%), loosening in 24 (11%) and infection in 20 (9%). Re-revisions because of pain were less frequent when complete component (fixed or loose) revision was undertaken compared with isolated exchange of the liner (RR = 0.20 (95% confidence interval 0.06% to 0.65%) and RR = 0.10 (95% confidence interval 0.03% to 0.30%), respectively). The risk of further acetabular revision for infection, however, did not differ between the groups. In this study, exchange of the liner only had a higher risk of further cup revision than revision of the complete acetabular component. Our results suggest that the threshold for revising well-fixed components in the case of liner wear and osteolysis should be lowered.

摘要

我们分析了向挪威关节置换登记处报告的初次非骨水泥髋臼组件翻修中不同策略的结果。目的是比较单纯衬垫更换和整个组件翻修后进一步髋臼翻修的风险。还比较了更换固定良好组件与更换松动髋臼组件的结果。研究时间段为1987年9月至2005年4月。比较了以下几组:第1组,仅在318例髋关节中更换衬垫;第2组,在398例中更换固定良好的组件;第3组,在933例中更换松动的组件。我们发现,与单纯更换衬垫相比,更换固定良好的组件(Cox模型相对风险(RR)=0.56,95%置信区间0.37%至0.87%)和松动组件(RR = 0.56,95%置信区间0.39%至0.80%)后进一步髋臼翻修的风险更低。进一步髋臼翻修最常见的原因是脱位,占再次翻修的61例(28%)。进一步翻修的其他原因包括疼痛27例(12%)、松动24例(11%)和感染20例(9%)。与单纯更换衬垫相比,进行整个组件(固定或松动)翻修时因疼痛导致的再次翻修频率较低(RR分别为0.20(95%置信区间0.06%至0.65%)和RR = 0.10(95%置信区间0.03%至0.30%))。然而,各组因感染导致进一步髋臼翻修的风险并无差异。在本研究中,仅更换衬垫比整个髋臼组件翻修有更高的进一步髋臼翻修风险。我们的结果表明,在衬垫磨损和骨溶解的情况下,翻修固定良好组件的阈值应降低。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验