University Clinic for Hand, Hip and Knee Surgery, Regional Hospital West Jutland, Holstebro;
Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Acta Orthop. 2020 Jun;91(3):246-253. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2020.1720978. Epub 2020 Feb 6.
Background and purpose - Elderly patients may benefit from a dislocation low-risk dual-mobility (DM) articulation in total hip arthroplasty, but the best cup fixation method is unknown. We compared cup migration for cemented and cementless DM cups using radiostereometry.Patients and methods - In a patient-blinded randomized trial, 60 patients (33 female) with osteoarthritis were allocated to cemented (n = 30) or cementless (n = 30) Avantage DM cup fixation. Criteria were age above 70 years, and T-score above -4. We investigated cup migration, periprosthetic bone mineral density (BMD), and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) until 24 months postoperative follow-up.Results - At 24 months mean proximal cup migration was 0.11 mm (95% CI 0.00-0.23) for cemented cups and 0.09 mm (CI -0.09 to 0.28) for cementless cups. However, cementless cups generally migrated more than cemented cups at 12 and 24 months. Cemented cups had no measurable migration from 3 months' follow-up, while cementless cups had not yet stabilized at 24 months in all rotations. Cementless cups showed statistically significantly more maximum total point motion (MTPM) at 12- and 24-month follow-up compared with cemented cups in patients with low systemic BMD (p = 0.01). Periprosthetic BMD changes did not statisticially significantly correlate to proximal migration in either cup fixation group (p > 0.05). PROMs improved similarly in both groups.Interpretation - Cemented cups were well fixed at 3 months. The cementless cups migrated more in patients with low BMD, showed an inconsistent pattern of migration, and migrated in different directions during the first and second year without tendency to stabilization. Cemented fixation of the Avantage DM cup seems safer in elderly patients.
背景与目的-老年患者可能从全髋关节置换术中脱位风险较低的双动(DM)关节中获益,但最佳杯固定方法尚不清楚。我们使用放射立体测量术比较了骨水泥固定和非骨水泥固定的 DM 杯的杯迁移。
患者和方法-在一项患者盲法随机试验中,将 60 名(33 名女性)骨关节炎患者分为骨水泥固定(n=30)或非骨水泥固定(n=30)Avantage DM 杯固定组。标准为年龄大于 70 岁,T 评分大于-4。我们研究了杯迁移、假体周围骨矿物质密度(BMD)和患者报告的结果测量(PROM),直到术后 24 个月随访。
结果-在 24 个月时,骨水泥固定杯的近端杯迁移平均值为 0.11mm(95%CI 0.00-0.23),而非骨水泥固定杯为 0.09mm(CI-0.09 至 0.28)。然而,在 12 和 24 个月时,非骨水泥固定杯通常比骨水泥固定杯迁移更多。骨水泥固定杯从 3 个月随访开始没有可测量的迁移,而非骨水泥固定杯在所有旋转中尚未在 24 个月时稳定。与骨水泥固定杯相比,低系统 BMD 的患者在 12 和 24 个月随访时非骨水泥固定杯的最大总点运动(MTPM)明显更多(p=0.01)。在任何杯固定组中,假体周围 BMD 变化与近端迁移均无统计学显著相关性(p>0.05)。两组的 PROM 均有类似改善。
结论-骨水泥固定杯在 3 个月时固定良好。低 BMD 的患者中非骨水泥固定杯迁移更多,其迁移模式不一致,在第一年和第二年的迁移方向不同,没有稳定的趋势。Avantage DM 杯的骨水泥固定在老年患者中似乎更安全。