Suppr超能文献

用于翻修全髋关节置换术的长方形植入物

[Oblong implants for revision total hip arthroplasty].

作者信息

Landor I, Vavrík P, Jahoda D, Pokorný D, Popelka S, Sosna A

机构信息

I. Ortopedická klinika 1. LF UK a FN Motol, Praha.

出版信息

Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2009 Dec;76(6):462-72.

Abstract

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

A prerequisite for the successful implantation of an acetabular component in a defective bone tissue is, in addition to providing sufficient primary fixation of the implant, reconstruction of the acetabular bone bed. To achieve this, one of the options involves the use of an oblong implant. Data published on this topic are sparse and therefore the aim of this study was to gain a deeper insight into this issue. In addition, we wanted to compare the results achieved with the oblong component with those obtained using its original model.

MATERIAL

One group comprised 111 patients with 133 sides who underwent acetabular revision for aseptic loosening or extraction of an infected acetabular component with subsequent implantation of an oblong cup (Langs-Ovale Revisionspfanne [L.O.R.], Allopro, Switzerland). The average age of this group at the time of surgery was 62.2 (range, 31-83) years, and average follow-up was 9.7 (range, 0.6-13.9) years. The other group consisted of 134 patients with 152 sides who for the same indications as the L.O.R. group received a Walter Oval cup (Medin Orthopaedics, Czech Republic). The average age at the time of surgery was 64.6 (22-86) years, and average follow-up was 7.3 (range, 1.1-9.8) years. The proportion and nature of defects and underlying clinical diagnoses in the two groups were statistically comparable. The patients requiring replacement or removal of the acetabular component were not included in clinical evaluation, but their data were used for survival analysis. The clinical evaluation included: in the L.O.R. group, 115 hip joints at an average follow-up of 10.8 (range, 4.5-13.9) years and, in the Walter Oval group, 144 hip joints at an average follow-up of 7.5 (range, 2.3-9.8) years. The data of patients who died during ;the study (L.O.R., 7 Walter Oval, 11) were included in the clinical evaluation as of the date of the final follow-up.

METHODS

The results for each group were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, with a simple survival curve and a"worst case" survival curve. The statistical difference between the curves was calculated by the Gehan-Wilcoxon test. Survival tables were constructed for 12 or 8 years. A comparison of the initial and the final Harris hip score (HHS) was made using the t-test. Radiographs were inspected for the signs of implant migration, the presence of translucent lines surrounding the implant and screws and screw breaks. The results were evaluated by the Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests, with the level of significance set at 0.05.

RESULTS

In the I.O.R. group, 18 implants (13.5%) were reimplanted or removed in the Walter Oval group it was eight cups (5.3%). Aseptic loosening was the cause of reimplantation in 8.3% and 3.9% of the hips in the L.O.R. and Walter Oval groups, respectively. Deep infection required revision surgery in 5.3% of the L.O.R hips, and in 1.3% of the Walter Oval hips. The Walter Oval group showed a longer implant survival, but this was not confirmed by the "worst case" analysis. The final HHS markedly improved in comparison with the initial one in both groups. No radiographic difference between the groups was found.

DISCUSSION

The comparison of our results with those of other methods used in the indications described here provides evidence in favour of oblong implants. The major advantage, as well as the condition of success, is the anchoring of an oblong cup in the patient's own load-bearing bone.

CONCLUSIONS

Acetabular defects in the range of Paprosky types IIB to IIIA are indicated for the use of oblong implants in a basic position. The Arbond hydroxyapatite coating providing an osteoactive surface for the oblong cup described significantly improves the survival of this implant in comparison with the original model.

摘要

研究目的

在有缺陷的骨组织中成功植入髋臼假体的一个先决条件是,除了要为植入物提供足够的初始固定外,还要重建髋臼骨床。为实现这一目标,一种选择是使用长方形植入物。关于这一主题发表的数据很少,因此本研究的目的是更深入地了解这个问题。此外,我们想将使用长方形假体取得的结果与使用其原始型号假体获得的结果进行比较。

材料

一组包括111例患者共133侧,这些患者因无菌性松动或取出感染的髋臼假体而接受髋臼翻修手术,随后植入长方形髋臼杯(Langs-Ovale Revisionspfanne [L.O.R.],Allopro,瑞士)。该组患者手术时的平均年龄为62.2岁(范围31 - 83岁),平均随访时间为9.7年(范围0.6 - 1,3.9年)。另一组由134例患者共152侧组成,他们因与L.O.R.组相同的适应证接受了Walter Oval髋臼杯(Medin Orthopaedics,捷克共和国)。手术时的平均年龄为64.6岁(22 - 86岁),平均随访时间为7.3年(范围1.1 - 9.8年)。两组中骨缺损的比例和性质以及潜在的临床诊断在统计学上具有可比性。需要更换或取出髋臼假体的患者未纳入临床评估,但他们的数据用于生存分析。临床评估包括:在L.O.R.组中,115个髋关节平均随访10.8年(范围4.5 - 13.9年),在Walter Oval组中,144个髋关节平均随访7.5年(范围2.3 - 9.8年)。在研究期间死亡的患者(L.O.R.组7例,Walter Oval组11例)的数据截至最后随访日期纳入临床评估。

方法

使用Kaplan-Meier生存分析评估每组结果,包括简单生存曲线和“最坏情况”生存曲线。通过Gehan-Wilcoxon检验计算曲线之间的统计学差异。构建了12年或8年的生存表。使用t检验比较初始和最终的Harris髋关节评分(HHS)。检查X线片以查看植入物移位的迹象、植入物和螺钉周围的透亮线以及螺钉断裂情况。结果通过卡方检验和Fisher精确检验进行评估,显著性水平设定为(0. / 05)。

结果

在L.O.R.组中,18个植入物(13.5%)被再次植入或取出,在Walter Oval组中为8个髋臼杯(5.3%)。无菌性松动分别是L.O.R.组和Walter Oval组8.3%和3.9%的髋关节再次植入的原因。深部感染需要在5.3%的L.O.R.髋关节和1.3%的Walter Oval髋关节中进行翻修手术。Walter Oval组显示出更长的植入物存活时间,但“最坏情况”分析未证实这一点。两组最终的HHS与初始相比均有显著改善。两组之间未发现X线片差异。

讨论

将我们的结果与此处所述适应证中使用的其他方法的结果进行比较,为长方形植入物提供了支持证据。主要优点以及成功的条件是将长方形髋臼杯锚固在患者自身的承重骨中。

结论

Paprosky IIB至IIIA型范围内的髋臼缺损适用于在基本位置使用长方形植入物。所述为长方形髋臼杯提供具有骨活性表面的Arbond羟基磷灰石涂层与原始型号相比显著提高了该植入物的存活率。

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