Suppr超能文献

翻修风险的挽救与急性全髋关节置换术相比股骨颈骨折:来自荷兰关节置换登记处的分析。

Revision risk of salvage compared with acute total hip arthroplasty following femoral neck fracture: an analysis from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register.

机构信息

Rijnstate Hospital, Department of Orthopedics, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem.

Radboud University Medical Center, Department of Operating Rooms, Nijmegen.

出版信息

Acta Orthop. 2023 Jul 31;94:399-403. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2023.17743.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There is no consensus on the treatment of patients with femoral neck fractures between internal fixation (IF) or directly treated with a total hip arthroplasty (fracture-THA) in particular for the age group 60-70 years. Failure of IF is not uncommon, resulting in salvage total hip arthroplasty (salvage-THA). The aim of our study was to compare revision rates of salvage-THA with fracture-THA and osteoarthritis (OA)-THA.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Revision rates and reasons for revision were compared. Data collected in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI) between 2007 and 2018 was used. The study included 4,310 salvage-THAs, 12,159 fracture-THAs, and 274,147 OA-THAs. We performed Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and Cox regression to evaluate THA survival.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference in revision rates between salvage-THAs and fracture-THAs was found (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.7-1.3) whereas the revision rate was higher compared with OA-THAs (HR 1.3, CI 1.0-1.5). The 5-year revision rate was 5.0% (CI 4.4-5.8) in salvage-THAs, 4.5% (CI 4.1-5.0) in fracture-THAs, and 3.1% (CI 3.0-3.2) in OA-THAs. A higher revision rate for infection was found in salvage-THAs in comparison with fracture-THAs (HR 1.6, CI 1.0-2.3).

CONCLUSION

We found no difference in revision rates for salvage-THAs compared with fracture-THAs. The risk of revision for infection was higher for salvage-THA.

摘要

背景与目的

对于 60-70 岁年龄段的患者,股骨颈骨折的治疗方法在采用内固定(IF)还是直接全髋关节置换术(骨折-THA)方面尚无共识。IF 失败并不少见,导致需要进行挽救性全髋关节置换术(挽救-THA)。我们的研究目的是比较挽救-THA 与骨折-THA 和骨关节炎(OA)-THA 的翻修率。

患者与方法

比较了翻修率和翻修原因。使用了 2007 年至 2018 年期间荷兰关节置换登记处(LROI)收集的数据。研究包括 4310 例挽救-THA、12159 例骨折-THA 和 274147 例 OA-THA。我们进行了 Kaplan-Meier 生存分析和 Cox 回归以评估 THA 生存率。

结果

挽救-THA 与骨折-THA 之间的翻修率无统计学显著差异(HR 1.0,95%CI 0.7-1.3),而与 OA-THA 相比,翻修率更高(HR 1.3,CI 1.0-1.5)。挽救-THA 的 5 年翻修率为 5.0%(CI 4.4-5.8),骨折-THA 为 4.5%(CI 4.1-5.0),OA-THA 为 3.1%(CI 3.0-3.2)。与骨折-THA 相比,挽救-THA 中感染的翻修率更高(HR 1.6,CI 1.0-2.3)。

结论

我们发现挽救-THA 与骨折-THA 的翻修率没有差异。挽救-THA 感染的翻修风险更高。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1b83/10388365/31403d7eec7c/ActaO-94-17743-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验