Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, 99 Huaihai Road, Xuzhou, 221002, Jiangsu, China.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, 139 Ziqiang Road, Shijiazhuang, 050000, Hebei, China.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2020 Jun 29;21(1):411. doi: 10.1186/s12891-020-03461-5.
Both cylindrical and tapered stems are commonly used in revision total hip arthroplasty. However, whether the geometry of prosthesis stem has an effect on patient prognosis is unclear. We assume that the tapered stem results in better clinical outcome than the cylindrical stem.
A multicenter review of 120 femoral revisions with Paprosky I, II, and III defects using cobalt chrome cylindrical stem (54 hips) or titanium tapered stem (66 hips) was performed with an average follow-up of 6 years. Demographic data were comparable between groups.
No significant group differences were found in surgery time, bleeding volume, postoperative Harris Hip Score, level of overall satisfaction, and 8-year cumulative survival. However, intraoperative fractures occurred significantly less in the tapered group (4.5%) than in the cylindrical group (14.8%), and stem subsidence was significantly less in the tapered group (2.17 mm) than in the cylindrical group (4.17 mm). A higher ratio of bone repair and lower bone loss were observed in the tapered group compared with the cylindrical group. The postoperative thigh pain rate was higher in the cylindrical group (12.9%) than in the tapered group (4.5%).
Both cylindrical stem and tapered stem can achieve satisfactory mid-term clinical results in revision total hip arthroplasty. The tapered stem has better bone restoration of proximal femur, lower incidence of intraoperative fractures, and lower postoperative thigh pain rate compared with the cylindrical stem.
在翻修全髋关节置换术中,常使用圆柱形和锥形股骨柄。然而,假体柄的几何形状是否会影响患者预后尚不清楚。我们假设锥形柄的临床效果优于圆柱形柄。
对 120 例股骨翻修患者(Paprosky I、II 和 III 型缺损)进行多中心回顾性研究,使用钴铬圆柱形柄(54 髋)或钛合金锥形柄(66 髋),平均随访 6 年。两组患者的人口统计学数据无显著差异。
手术时间、失血量、术后 Harris 髋关节评分、总体满意度水平和 8 年累计生存率无显著组间差异。然而,锥形组术中骨折发生率(4.5%)显著低于圆柱形组(14.8%),锥形组股骨柄下沉程度(2.17mm)显著低于圆柱形组(4.17mm)。锥形组骨修复比例较高,骨丢失较少。与锥形组相比,圆柱形组术后大腿疼痛发生率较高(12.9%)。
在翻修全髋关节置换术中,圆柱形柄和锥形柄均可获得满意的中期临床效果。与圆柱形柄相比,锥形柄具有更好的股骨近端骨修复、较低的术中骨折发生率和较低的术后大腿疼痛发生率。