Myers G J C, Morgan D, McBryde C W, O'Dwyer K
Worcester Royal Hospital, Charles Hastings Way, Worcester, WR5 1DD, UK.
Int Orthop. 2009 Feb;33(1):59-63. doi: 10.1007/s00264-007-0469-8. Epub 2007 Oct 30.
The aim of this study was to compare the component positioning of Birmingham Hip Resurfacings implanted through a posterolateral approach with those inserted via a direct lateral approach. Sixty-four hip resurfacings for osteoarthritis were carried out by a single surgeon: 23 through a direct lateral approach and 41 through a posterolateral approach. No significant differences in implant survival, Oxford Hip Scores or complications were found. The mean abduction angle for the acetabular component was lower (p < 0.007) with a posterior approach (mean: 37.5 degrees ; range 26-50 degrees ) than the lateral approach (mean: 43 degrees ; range 30-56 degrees ). There was no significant difference in stem orientation, either in flexion/extension or varus/valgus, between the two groups. This study demonstrates that components can be implanted in an acceptable orientation through either approach but that the posterior approach results in greater closure of the acetabular component.
本研究的目的是比较经后外侧入路植入的伯明翰髋关节表面置换假体与经直接外侧入路植入的假体的组件定位情况。一位外科医生对64例骨关节炎患者进行了髋关节表面置换手术:23例采用直接外侧入路,41例采用后外侧入路。在植入物存活率、牛津髋关节评分或并发症方面未发现显著差异。髋臼组件的平均外展角度在后外侧入路时(平均:37.5度;范围26 - 50度)低于直接外侧入路(平均:43度;范围30 - 56度)(p < 0.007)。两组之间在柄的屈伸或内翻/外翻方向上没有显著差异。本研究表明,两种入路均可将组件以可接受的方向植入,但后外侧入路会使髋臼组件的闭合度更大。