• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

骨水泥型与非骨水泥型全髋关节置换术的围手术期及短期疗效:一项回顾性倾向评分匹配分析

Perioperative and short-term outcomes of cemented versus cementless total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective propensity-matched analysis.

作者信息

Haider Muhammad A, Garry Conor, Rajahraman Vinaya, Chau Isabelle, Schwarzkopf Ran, Davidovitch Roy I, Macaulay William

机构信息

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NYU Langone Health, 301 East 17th Street, New York, NY, 10003, USA.

出版信息

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 Dec 12;145(1):15. doi: 10.1007/s00402-024-05709-4.

DOI:10.1007/s00402-024-05709-4
PMID:39666083
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cement fixation for total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains a controversial topic. While cemented stems are associated with lower risk of periprosthetic fractures (PPF), cementless stems may offer superior biological fixation. This study analyzed peri-operative and short-term outcomes of cemented vs. cementless stem fixation in THA.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on 15,012 patients who underwent primary elective THA at an academic medical center from 2011 to 2021. Of these patients, 429 were cemented. Patients were stratified into 3 age cohorts (25-69, 70-79 and ≥ 80 years). Cemented stem patients were 1:1 propensity-score matched to cementless stem patients for baseline characteristics. Perioperative and short-term outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

The mean operative time for cemented cases was significantly longer across all age cohorts (25-69, P = 0.005; 70-79, P < 0.001; ≥80, P < 0.001). In the 70-79 and ≥ 80 cohorts, cemented patients demonstrated a significantly shorter length of stay (LOS) compared to cementless patients (2.2 vs. 2.6 days, P = 0.017; 3.0 vs. 3.4, P = 0.041, respectively). In the 70-79 and ≥ 80 cohorts, cemented patients were significantly more likely to be discharged home when compared to cementless patients (88.2 vs. 80.5%, P = 0.031; 64.0 vs. 54.2%, P = 0.046, respectively). Across age cohorts, there were no differences in all-cause revision rates (Cohort 1: 5.4% vs. 1.1%, P = 0.108; Cohort 2: 3.0% vs. 1.8%, P = 0.362; Cohort 3: 1.8% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.714). The ≥ 80 cohort demonstrated increased rates of PPF in the cementless cohort compared to cemented (1.2 vs. 0%, P = 0.082, respectively), but it did not reach significance.

CONCLUSION

Patient age has a substantial impact on perioperative outcomes following cemented versus cementless stem THA. Patients > 70 with a cemented femoral stem had improved perioperative outcomes such as shorter LOS, increased discharge to home and reduced rates of PPF compared to their cementless stem counterparts. Patient age should be considered prior to selecting a stem fixation strategy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, Therapeutic Study.

摘要

背景

全髋关节置换术(THA)的骨水泥固定仍然是一个有争议的话题。虽然骨水泥型股骨柄假体周围骨折(PPF)风险较低,但非骨水泥型股骨柄假体可能提供更好的生物学固定。本研究分析了THA中骨水泥型与非骨水泥型股骨柄假体固定的围手术期和短期结果。

方法

对2011年至2021年在一家学术医疗中心接受初次择期THA的15012例患者进行回顾性研究。其中,429例采用骨水泥固定。患者被分为3个年龄组(25 - 69岁、70 - 79岁和≥80岁)。根据倾向得分将骨水泥型股骨柄假体患者与非骨水泥型股骨柄假体患者按1:1匹配基线特征。比较围手术期和短期结果。

结果

在所有年龄组中,骨水泥固定病例的平均手术时间显著更长(25 - 69岁,P = 0.005;70 - 79岁,P < 0.001;≥80岁,P < 0.001)。在70 - 79岁和≥80岁年龄组中,与非骨水泥型股骨柄假体患者相比,骨水泥固定患者的住院时间显著更短(分别为2.2天对2.6天,P = 0.017;3.0天对3.4天,P = 0.041)。在70 - 79岁和≥80岁年龄组中,与非骨水泥型股骨柄假体患者相比,骨水泥固定患者出院回家的可能性显著更高(分别为88.2%对80.5%,P = 0.031;64.0%对54.2%,P = 0.046)。在各年龄组中,全因翻修率无差异(第1组:5.4%对1.1%,P = 0.108;第2组:3.0%对1.8%,P = 0.362;第3组:1.8%对1.2%,P = 0.714)。≥80岁年龄组中,非骨水泥型股骨柄假体组的PPF发生率高于骨水泥固定组(分别为1.2%对0%,P = 0.082),但未达到统计学意义。

结论

患者年龄对骨水泥型与非骨水泥型股骨柄假体THA后的围手术期结果有重大影响。与非骨水泥型股骨柄假体患者相比,年龄>70岁且采用骨水泥固定股骨柄的患者围手术期结果更好,如住院时间更短、出院回家比例增加以及PPF发生率降低。在选择股骨柄固定策略之前应考虑患者年龄。

证据级别

III,治疗性研究。

相似文献

1
Perioperative and short-term outcomes of cemented versus cementless total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective propensity-matched analysis.骨水泥型与非骨水泥型全髋关节置换术的围手术期及短期疗效:一项回顾性倾向评分匹配分析
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 Dec 12;145(1):15. doi: 10.1007/s00402-024-05709-4.
2
Cemented Versus Cementless Femoral Fixation for Total Hip Arthroplasty Following Femoral Neck Fracture in Patients Aged 65 and Older.骨水泥固定与非骨水泥固定在 65 岁及以上股骨颈骨折患者全髋关节置换术后的疗效比较。
J Arthroplasty. 2024 Jul;39(7):1747-1751. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2024.01.034. Epub 2024 Jan 20.
3
Cemented vs cementless stems for revision arthroplasties due to Vancouver B2 periprosthetic hip fracture.骨水泥型与非骨水泥型假体治疗 Vancouver B2 型髋关节假体周围骨折翻修术的比较。
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2024 Jul;34(5):2573-2580. doi: 10.1007/s00590-024-03961-3. Epub 2024 May 2.
4
Cemented Versus Cementless Femoral Fixation for Total Hip Arthroplasty Following Osteoarthritis.骨水泥固定与非骨水泥固定在骨关节炎全髋关节置换术后的应用比较。
J Arthroplasty. 2024 Jun;39(6):1545-1549. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2023.12.024. Epub 2023 Dec 20.
5
How Much Protection Does a Collar Provide? Assessing Risk of Early Periprosthetic Femur Fractures Following Total Hip Arthroplasty in Elderly Patients.颈圈能提供多大的保护?评估老年患者全髋关节置换术后早期股骨假体周围骨折的风险。
J Arthroplasty. 2024 Apr;39(4):997-1000.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2023.10.020. Epub 2023 Oct 16.
6
Postoperative 30-day complications after cemented/hybrid versus cementless total hip arthroplasty in osteoarthritis patients > 70 years.骨关节炎患者>70 岁行骨水泥/混合与非骨水泥全髋关节置换术后 30 天并发症。
Acta Orthop. 2020 Jun;91(3):286-292. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2020.1745420. Epub 2020 Apr 14.
7
Do Rerevision Rates Differ After First-time Revision of Primary THA With a Cemented and Cementless Femoral Component?使用骨水泥型和非骨水泥型股骨假体进行初次全髋关节置换翻修术后的翻修率是否存在差异?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Nov;473(11):3391-8. doi: 10.1007/s11999-015-4245-6.
8
Are There Differences in Performance Among Femoral Stem Brands Utilized in Cementless Hemiarthroplasty for Treatment of Geriatric Femoral Neck Fractures?在用于治疗老年股骨颈骨折的非骨水泥半髋关节置换术中,不同品牌的股骨柄在性能上是否存在差异?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 Feb 1;483(2):253-264. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003222. Epub 2024 Aug 15.
9
Cementless Fixation Is Associated With Increased Risk of Early and All-Time Revision After Hemiarthroplasty But Not After THA for Femoral Neck Fracture: Results From the American Joint Replacement Registry.骨水泥固定与半髋关节置换术后早期和全时翻修风险增加相关,但与股骨颈骨折的全髋关节置换术无关:来自美国关节置换登记处的结果。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2021 Oct 1;479(10):2194-2202. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001932.
10
Is Cemented or Cementless Femoral Stem Fixation More Durable in Patients Older Than 75 Years of Age? A Comparison of the Best-performing Stems.75 岁以上患者中,骨水泥型或非骨水泥型股骨柄固定哪个更耐用?最佳表现的柄的比较。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018 Jul;476(7):1428-1437. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000533621.57561.a4.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of Different Materials in the Same-Sized Cemented Stems on Periprosthetic Fractures in Bone Models.相同尺寸骨水泥柄不同材料对骨模型假体周围骨折影响的比较
J Clin Med. 2025 Apr 15;14(8):2724. doi: 10.3390/jcm14082724.

本文引用的文献

1
Similar revision rate after cemented and cementless femoral revisions for periprosthetic femoral fractures in total hip arthroplasty: analysis of 1,879 revision hip arthroplasties in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register.全髋关节置换术后假体周围股骨骨折的骨水泥固定和非骨水泥固定翻修后相似的修正率:荷兰关节置换登记处 1879 例翻修髋关节置换术的分析。
Acta Orthop. 2023 May 22;94:260-265. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2023.13211.
2
Cementation in total hip arthroplasty: history, principles, and technique.全髋关节置换术中的骨水泥固定:历史、原理与技术。
EFORT Open Rev. 2022 Dec 7;7(11):747-757. doi: 10.1530/EOR-22-0002.
3
Are We Training Surgeons to Cement a Femoral Component in Hip Arthroplasty? The Trainees' Perspective.
我们是否在培训髋关节置换术中固定股骨部件的外科医生?从学员的角度来看。
J Arthroplasty. 2022 Jul;37(7S):S536-S539. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2022.03.005. Epub 2022 Mar 9.
4
Cemented or Uncemented Hemiarthroplasty for Intracapsular Hip Fracture.骨水泥型或非骨水泥型人工股骨头置换术治疗囊内型髋关节骨折。
N Engl J Med. 2022 Feb 10;386(6):521-530. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2108337.
5
Cause-Specific Stem Revision Risk in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Using Cemented vs Cementless Femoral Stem Fixation in a US Cohort.使用骨水泥固定与非骨水泥固定股骨柄在全髋关节初次置换中特定病因的翻修风险:一项美国队列研究。
J Arthroplasty. 2022 Jan;37(1):89-96.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2021.09.020. Epub 2021 Oct 5.
6
Cemented Vs Cementless Femoral Fixation for Total Hip Arthroplasty After Displaced Femoral Neck Fracture: A Nationwide Analysis of Short-Term Complications and Readmission Rates.骨水泥型与非骨水泥型股骨固定在移位股骨颈骨折全髋关节置换术后的比较:短期并发症和再入院率的全国性分析。
J Arthroplasty. 2021 Nov;36(11):3667-3675.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2021.06.029. Epub 2021 Jul 1.
7
Total Hip Arthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fracture: What Are the Contemporary Reasons for Failure?全髋关节置换治疗股骨颈骨折:失败的当代原因是什么?
J Arthroplasty. 2021 Jul;36(7S):S272-S276. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2021.02.008. Epub 2021 Feb 6.
8
What Are the Frequency, Related Mortality, and Factors Associated with Bone Cement Implantation Syndrome in Arthroplasty Surgery?关节置换手术中骨水泥植入综合征的频率、相关死亡率及相关因素是什么?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2021 Apr 1;479(4):755-763. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001541.
9
The Use of Cement in Hip Arthroplasty: A Contemporary Perspective.髋关节置换术中的骨水泥应用:当代视角。
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2020 Jul 15;28(14):e586-e594. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-19-00604.
10
Does Femoral Component Cementation Affect Costs or Clinical Outcomes After Hip Arthroplasty in Medicare Patients?股骨组件骨水泥固定是否会影响 Medicare 患者髋关节置换术后的成本或临床结果?
J Arthroplasty. 2020 Jun;35(6):1489-1496.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.01.035. Epub 2020 Jan 23.