Department of Orthopedics, Xiang Ya Hospital Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Sci Rep. 2013 Sep 30;3:2796. doi: 10.1038/srep02796.
There is an increasing trend towards cementless modular femoral prostheses for revision hip replacement surgery, especially in patients with severe proximal femoral bone defects. However, for minor femoral bone defects, the benefit of cementless modular is not clear. We designed a retrospective cross-sectional study to compare outcomes of the two femoral implant designs. There were no significant differences in terms of visual analog pain scores, Harris hip scores, femoral bone restoration, stem subsidence, leg length correction, or overall complication rate. Three femoral reoperations (11%) occurred in the cemented group, and two (9%) in the cementless modular group. One femoral stem re-revised (4%) in the cemented group due to recurrent deep infection. Five-year survival for femoral reoperation was 88.2% for patients with the cemented implant and 91.3% for cementless group. Both groups had good clinical and radiological outcomes for femoral revision in patients with minor femoral bone defects during medium-term follow-up.
对于翻修髋关节置换手术,越来越倾向于使用非骨水泥模块化股骨假体,尤其是在存在严重股骨近端骨缺损的患者中。然而,对于较小的股骨骨缺损,非骨水泥模块化的优势尚不清楚。我们设计了一项回顾性的横截面研究,以比较两种股骨植入物设计的结果。在视觉模拟疼痛评分、Harris 髋关节评分、股骨骨恢复、柄下沉、下肢长度矫正或总体并发症发生率方面,两组均无显著差异。在骨水泥组中发生了 3 次股骨再手术(11%),在非骨水泥模块化组中发生了 2 次(9%)。由于反复深部感染,骨水泥组中有 1 例股骨柄再次修订(4%)。在 5 年随访时,股骨再手术的生存率在骨水泥组为 88.2%,在非骨水泥组为 91.3%。在中期随访中,两组在股骨骨缺损较小的患者中进行股骨翻修时均取得了良好的临床和影像学结果。