Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Jinju, Korea.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Daejeon Eulji Medical Center, Eulji University School of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea.
J Korean Med Sci. 2022 Feb 14;37(6):e41. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2022.37.e41.
The purpose of this study was to determine whether short tapered stems reduce the rate of thigh pain through a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies between short tapered stems and standard-length tapered stems.
We conducted a meta-analysis of comparative studies: 1) retrospective studies and 2) randomized controlled trials (RCTs), on 2 stem designs: short tapered stem versus standard-length tapered stem. Studies were selected by means of the following criteria: 1) study design: retrospective comparative studies, prospective comparative studies, RCTs; 2) study population: patients with total hip arthroplasty or hemiarthroplasty for hip disease or hip fracture; 3) intervention: short tapered stem and standard tapered stem; and 4) outcomes; thigh pain, other clinical results.
Among the 250 articles that were identified at the initial search, 6 studies, 4 RCTs and 2 retrospective comparative studies, were included in this meta-analysis. In the analysis of retrospective studies, the short tapered stem reduced the risk of thigh pain compared to the standard tapered stem (risk ratio [RR] = 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02-0.09; Z = -2.07; = 0.039). However, in the analysis of RCTs, the incidence of thigh pain was similar between the two stem designs (RR = 1.21; 95% CI, 0.76-1.93; Z = 0.82; = 0.410). Overall meta-analysis including all studies showed that the short tapered stem did not reduce the incidence of thigh pain compared to the standard-length tapered stem (RR = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.59-1.40; Z = -0.44, = 0.663).
We did not find a significant difference in the incidence of thigh pain between short tapered stem and standard tapered stem in hip arthroplasty.
PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42021231240.
本研究旨在通过对短柄锥形股骨柄与标准柄锥形股骨柄的对比研究的系统评价和荟萃分析,确定短柄锥形股骨柄是否能降低大腿疼痛发生率。
我们对两种股骨柄设计(短柄锥形股骨柄与标准柄锥形股骨柄)的对比研究进行了荟萃分析:1)回顾性研究和 2)随机对照试验(RCT)。研究通过以下标准进行选择:1)研究设计:回顾性对比研究、前瞻性对比研究、RCT;2)研究人群:患有髋关节疾病或髋部骨折行全髋关节置换术或半髋关节置换术的患者;3)干预措施:短柄锥形股骨柄和标准柄锥形股骨柄;4)结局:大腿疼痛、其他临床结果。
在最初的搜索中确定了 250 篇文章,其中纳入了 6 项研究,4 项 RCT 和 2 项回顾性对比研究。在回顾性研究的分析中,与标准柄锥形股骨柄相比,短柄锥形股骨柄降低了大腿疼痛的风险(风险比[RR] = 0.13;95%置信区间[CI],0.02-0.09;Z = -2.07;= 0.039)。然而,在 RCT 的分析中,两种股骨柄设计的大腿疼痛发生率相似(RR = 1.21;95%CI,0.76-1.93;Z = 0.82;= 0.410)。包括所有研究的总体荟萃分析表明,与标准柄锥形股骨柄相比,短柄锥形股骨柄并未降低大腿疼痛的发生率(RR = 0.91;95%CI,0.59-1.40;Z = -0.44;= 0.663)。
我们未发现髋关节置换术中短柄锥形股骨柄与标准柄锥形股骨柄大腿疼痛发生率存在显著差异。
PROSPERO 标识符:CRD42021231240。