Khan Abdul Q, Chowdhry Madhav, Sherwani Mohd K A, McPherson Edward J
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Bone Jt Open. 2023 May 8;4(5):329-337. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.45.BJO-2023-0016.R1.
Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is considered the preferred treatment for displaced proximal femoral neck fractures. However, in many countries this option is economically unviable. To improve outcomes in financially disadvantaged populations, we studied the technique of concomitant valgus hip osteotomy and operative fixation (VOOF). This prospective serial study compares two treatment groups: VOOF versus operative fixation alone with cannulated compression screws (CCSs). In the first series, 98 hip fixation procedures were performed using CCS. After fluoroscopic reduction of the fracture, three CCSs were placed. In the second series, 105 VOOF procedures were performed using a closing wedge intertrochanteric osteotomy with a compression lag screw and lateral femoral plate. The alignment goal was to create a modified Pauwel's fracture angle of 30°. After fluoroscopic reduction of fracture, lag screw was placed to achieve the calculated correction angle, followed by inter-trochanteric osteotomy and placement of barrel plate. Patients were followed for a minimum of two years. Mean follow-up was 4.6 years (4.1 to 5.0) in the CCS group and 5.5 years (5.25 to 5.75) in the VOOF group. The mean Harris Hip Score at two-year follow-up was 83.85 in the CCS group versus 88.00 in the VOOF group (p < 0.001). At the latest follow-up, all-cause failure rate was 29.1% in the CCS group and 11.7% in the VOOF group (p = 0.003). The total cost of the VOOF technique was 7.2% of a THA, and total cost of the CCS technique was 6.3% of a THA. The VOOF technique decreased all-cause failure rate compared to CCS. The total cost of VOOF was 13.5% greater than CCS, but 92.8% less than a THA. Increased cost of VOOF was considered acceptable to all patients in this series. VOOF technique provides a reasonable alternative to THA in patients who cannot afford a THA procedure.
全髋关节置换术(THA)被认为是移位型股骨近端颈骨折的首选治疗方法。然而,在许多国家,这种选择在经济上不可行。为了改善经济条件较差人群的治疗效果,我们研究了外翻髋关节截骨术与手术内固定(VOOF)技术。这项前瞻性系列研究比较了两个治疗组:VOOF组与单纯使用空心加压螺钉(CCS)进行手术内固定组。在第一个系列中,使用CCS进行了98例髋关节固定手术。在透视下骨折复位后,置入3枚CCS。在第二个系列中,使用闭合楔形转子间截骨术加加压拉力螺钉和股骨外侧钢板进行了105例VOOF手术。对线目标是形成改良的 Pauwel 骨折角为30°。在透视下骨折复位后,置入拉力螺钉以达到计算出的矫正角度,随后进行转子间截骨并置入钢板。对患者进行了至少两年的随访。CCS组的平均随访时间为4.6年(4.1至5.0年),VOOF组为5.5年(5.25至5.75年)。在两年随访时,CCS组的平均 Harris 髋关节评分是83.85,而VOOF组为88.00(p < 0.001)。在最近一次随访时,CCS组的全因失败率为29.1%,VOOF组为11.7%(p = 0.003)。VOOF技术的总成本是THA的7.2%,CCS技术的总成本是THA的6.3%。与CCS相比,VOOF技术降低了全因失败率。VOOF的总成本比CCS高13.5%,但比THA低92.8%。在本系列中,所有患者都认为VOOF增加的成本是可以接受的。对于无力承担THA手术的患者,VOOF技术为THA提供了一种合理的替代方案。