Dataset Information

Is there a reduction in risk of revision when 36-mm heads instead of 32 mm are used in total hip arthroplasty for patients with proximal femur fractures?

ABSTRACT: Background and purpose - 32-mm heads are widely used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) in Scandinavia, while the proportion of 36-mm heads is increasing as they are expected to increase THA stability. We investigated whether the use of 36-mm heads in THA after proximal femur fracture (PFF) is associated with a lower risk of revision compared with 32-mm heads.Patients and methods - We included 5,030 patients operated with THA due to PFF with 32- or 36-mm heads from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database. Each patient with a 36-mm head was matched with a patient with a 32-mm head, using propensity score. The patients were operated between 2006 and 2016, with a metal or ceramic head on a polyethylene bearing. Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to estimate the unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for revision for any reason and revision due to dislocation for 36-mm heads compared with 32-mm heads.Results - 36-mm heads had an HR of 0.9 (CI 0.7-1.2) for revision for any reason and 0.8 (CI 0.5-1.3) for revision due to dislocation compared with 32-mm heads at a median follow-up of 2.5 years (interquartile range 1-4.4).Interpretation - We were not able to demonstrate any clinically relevant reduction of the risk of THA revision for any reason or due to dislocation when 36-mm heads were used versus 32-mm. Residual confounding due to lack of data on patient comorbidities and body mass index could bias our results.

SUBMITTER: Tsikandylakis G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8023875 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTotal hip arthroplasty (THA) is the treatment of choice for posttraumatic arthritis with failed internal fixation for hip fractures. However, the postoperative prognosis is not clear.Questions/purposesThe primary aim of the study is to report the postoperative outcome, prognosis, and complication rates of total hip arthroplasty in posttraumatic hip arthritis after failed internal fixation of fractures around the hip. The secondary aim of the study is to report results among different fracture types around the hip.Patients and methodsWe enrolled salvage THA patients after failed internal fixation of fractures around the hip and matched control patients undergoing primary THA for hip osteoarthritis. Subgroup analysis was performed to compare the postoperative outcomes, prognosis, and complication rates of salvage THA in posttraumatic hip arthritis after failed internal fixation of different fracture types around the hip.ResultsA total of 315 THAs (105 salvage THAs and 210 primary THAs) were analyzed. Patients with salvage THA had a longer operative time, lower postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) level, more Hb drop (2.2 ± 1.4 vs. 1.7 ± 1.2 gm/dl, p = 0.002), and delayed ambulation. The salvage THA group also had a higher dislocation rate within 2 months after salvage THA (9.5% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.002), reoperation rate (10.5% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.019, including debridement, open and closed reduction under sedation, revision surgery, surgical fixation for periprosthetic fractures), and revision rate (5.7% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.003) than patients undergoing primary THA. Patients who had failed fixation for acetabular fractures were younger and tended to recover well. Patients with previous intertrochanteric fracture had the longest operative time, more hip pain (83.8%, p = 0.022) and more complications.ConclusionSalvage THA in posttraumatic hip arthritis after failed internal fixation required a longer operative time and led to more blood loss and postoperative complications. The dislocation, reoperation, and revision rates after salvage THA were higher than those after primary THA. Patients with salvage THA after failed internal fixation for intertrochanteric fractures were the most susceptible to more complications compared to those with femoral neck fracture or acetabular fracture. Level of Evidence level III.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral strategies for the treatment of pathologic proximal femur fractures are practiced but treatment outcomes have not been rigorously compared.Questions/purposesMajor variations in the use of intramedullary fixation, extramedullary/plate-screw fixation, and endoprosthetic reconstruction techniques for pathologic proximal femur fractures in patients with skeletal metastases are reported. The clinical and surgical variables that influence this choice differ among treating surgeons. To characterize the technique preferences and to identify areas of consensus regarding specific clinical presentations, we administered an online survey to the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) membership. We also tested whether responses correlated with the respondents' years in practice and asked about the indications for wide tumor resection and the role of tumor debulking and adjuvant cementation.MethodsA 10-minute, web-based survey was sent via email to 244 MSTS members. The survey queried participants' musculoskeletal oncology training and experience and presented case scenarios illustrating different combinations of four variables that influence decision-making: cancer type, estimated patient survival, fracture displacement, and anatomic region of involvement.ResultsForty-one percent (n = 98) of MSTS members completed the survey. Intramedullary nail fixation (IMN; 45%) and proximal femur resection and reconstruction (34%) were the most commonly recommended techniques followed by long-stem cemented hemiarthroplasty/cemented hemiarthroplasty (15%) and open reduction and internal fixation (7%). Most respondents (56%) recommended use of cementation with IMN. Differences of opinion on recommended treatment were associated with variations in cancer type, fracture displacement, and anatomic region of involvement.ConclusionsOur online survey showed a trend among MSTS members for selecting IMN and arthroplasty-related techniques to treat pathologic fractures of the proximal femur, but major differences in preferred operative technique exist. Prospective studies are needed to develop consistent, evidence-based treatment recommendations.

Project description:BackgroundEarly postoperative physical activity in elderly patients suffering from proximal femoral fractures may reduce mortality. We hypothesized that activity trackers can reliably and objectively monitor the in-hospital mobilization, correlating with functional independence and quality of life.MethodsThree different tracker types (Fitbit™ flex, Misfit™ Shine, and Axivity AX3) at three locations (wrist, ankle, and femur) recorded steps and signal vector magnitudes (SVM) in 22 patients. They were 81 ± 8 years old, were equally distributed between the sexes, and had an ASA score of 2.5 ± 0.6. Single protocoled activity events (n = 191) were clinically categorized into 4 levels and correlated with the monitored signals. Additionally, 2 ± 1 and 8 ± 3 days after the operation, the EuroQol-5D and the Barthel-20 index supplemented this data.ResultsAll measurements at the wrist (Fitbit, Misfit) resulted in unacceptable accuracy; however, sensitivity and specificity reached around 90% using the Misfit at the ankle. Applying this combination, the correlation between real and measured steps (R2 = 0.99) and the category discrimination were statistically significant (p < 0.002). A discriminant analysis featured the calculation of four activity levels based on SVM measurements using the Axivity tracker at the femur. A cluster analysis showed a 100% agreement between the clinically observed and the calculated activity levels. The amount of active minutes or periods and both the EuroQol-5D and the Barthel-20 indices significantly increased between the analyzed time points after the operation. However, only the Barthel-20 was associated with the measured activity levels (p < 0.01).ConclusionThe Misfit and the Axivity trackers can reliably monitor activity in elderly patients after operative treatment of proximal femur fractures. However, the wear location is decisive. Objectively measured activity correlated with functional independence and quality of life.

Dataset Information

Is there a reduction in risk of revision when 36-mm heads instead of 32 mm are used in total hip arthroplasty for patients with proximal femur fractures?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets