vanWinterswijk P J T S, Whitehouse S L, Timperley A J, Hubble M J W, Howell J R, Wilson M J
Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust, Barrack Road, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK.
Queensland University of Technology (QUT) , Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Bone Joint J. 2017 Nov;99-B(11):1450-1457. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B11.BJJ-2017-0138.R1.
We report the incidence of radiolucent lines (RLLs) using two flanged acetabular components at total hip arthroplasty (THA) and the effect of the Rim Cutter.
We performed a retrospective review of 300 hips in 292 patients who underwent primary cemented THA. A contemporary flanged acetabular component was used with (group 1) and without (group 2) the use of the Rim Cutter and the Rimfit acetabular component was used with the Rim Cutter (group 3). RLLs and clinical outcomes were evaluated immediately post-operatively and at five years post-operatively.
There was no significant difference in the incidence of RLLs on the immediate post-operative radiographs (p = 0.241) or at five years post-operatively (p = 0.463). RLLs were seen on the immediate post-operative radiograph in 2% of hips in group 1, in 5% in group 2 and in 7% in group 3. Five years post-operatively, there were RLLs in 42% of hips in group 1, 41% in group 2 and in 49% in group 3. In the vast majority of hips, in each group, the RLL was present in DeLee and Charnley zone 1 only (86%, 83%, 67% respectively). Oxford and Harris Hip scores improved significantly in all groups. There was no significant difference in these scores or in the change in scores between the groups, with follow-up.
Despite the Rim Cutter showing promising results in early laboratory and clinical studies, this analysis of the radiological and clinical outcome five years post-operatively does not show any advantage over and above modern cementing techniques in combination with a well performing cemented acetabular component. For this reason, we no longer use the Rim Cutter in routine primary THA. Cite this article: 2017;99-B:1450-7.
我们报告了在全髋关节置换术(THA)中使用两种带翼髋臼组件时透亮线(RLLs)的发生率以及髋臼锉的作用。
我们对292例接受初次骨水泥型THA的患者的300个髋关节进行了回顾性研究。一组(第1组)使用了当代带翼髋臼组件并使用髋臼锉,另一组(第2组)使用了当代带翼髋臼组件但未使用髋臼锉,第3组使用Rimfit髋臼组件并使用髋臼锉。在术后即刻和术后五年对RLLs和临床结果进行评估。
术后即刻X线片上RLLs的发生率(p = 0.241)或术后五年(p = 0.463)无显著差异。术后即刻X线片上,第1组2%的髋关节、第2组5%的髋关节和第3组7%的髋关节出现RLLs。术后五年,第1组42%的髋关节、第2组41%的髋关节和第3组49%的髋关节出现RLLs。在每组的绝大多数髋关节中,RLL仅出现在DeLee和Charnley 1区(分别为86%、83%、67%)。所有组的牛津和Harris髋关节评分均显著改善。随访时,这些评分或组间评分变化无显著差异。
尽管髋臼锉在早期实验室和临床研究中显示出有前景的结果,但对术后五年的放射学和临床结果分析表明,与结合性能良好的骨水泥髋臼组件的现代骨水泥技术相比,并无任何优势。因此,我们在常规初次THA中不再使用髋臼锉。引用本文:2017;99-B:1450-7。