Paton R W, Hirst P
Hope Hospital, Salford.
Injury. 1989 May;20(3):167-9. doi: 10.1016/0020-1383(89)90091-0.
A retrospective study was undertaken on 171 patients who had suffered a subcapital fracture of the neck of the femur between 1982 and 1986. The aim was to compare the dislocation rates in bipolar and monopolar endoprostheses. The basic surgical approaches were utilized: the posterior and direct lateral. Four endoprostheses were employed: Thompson's Moore's (monopolar), Monk's 'hard top', and Charnley-Hastings' (bipolar). There was no significant difference in the dislocation rates between monopolar and bipolar devices. It is concluded that the bipolar devices do not offer any additional protection against dislocation when compared with the traditional monopolar devices.
对1982年至1986年间发生股骨颈头下骨折的171例患者进行了一项回顾性研究。目的是比较双极和单极人工关节置换假体的脱位率。采用了基本的手术入路：后路和直接外侧入路。使用了四种人工关节置换假体：汤普森氏、摩尔氏（单极）、蒙克氏“硬顶”和查恩利 - 黑斯廷斯氏（双极）。单极和双极假体的脱位率没有显著差异。得出的结论是，与传统的单极假体相比，双极假体在防止脱位方面没有提供任何额外的保护。
