Literature DB >> 10068000

Is revision as good as primary hip replacement? A comparison of quality of life.

A H Robinson1, C R Palmer, R N Villar.   

Abstract

Primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most effective ways of improving quality of life (QoL). We have compared the improvement in QoL in 62 patients who had a cemented revision of a THA with that of 62 primary replacements. One year after operation the median QoL score had been significantly improved in both groups; from 0.870 to 0.990 in the primary group (p < 0.0001) and from 0.870 to 0.980 in the revised group (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the improvement in scores between the groups (p = 0.29). When reviewed after four years there was no difference in the pain score for either group (p = 0.89), but that for function had deteriorated significantly. This was associated with revision surgery (p = 0.018) and a low preoperative QoL score (p = 0.004). We conclude that both primary and revision operations give a significant improvement in the QoL but function after revision may be less durable than after a primary arthroplasty.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10068000     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.81b1.8728

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br        ISSN: 0301-620X


  15 in total

1.  Clinical and radiological outcome of hydroxyapatite-coated femoral stem in revision hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  T Gosens; E J van Langelaan
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2005-05-18       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Why revision total hip arthroplasty fails.

Authors:  Bryan D Springer; Thomas K Fehring; William L Griffin; Susan M Odum; John L Masonis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-10-31       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 3.  Total hip arthroplasty: areview of advances, advantages and limitations.

Authors:  Xin-Wei Liu; Ying Zi; Liang-Bi Xiang; Yu Wang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-01-15

4.  Functional outcome following aseptic single-stage revision knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Ajay Malviya; Nigel T Brewster; Karen Bettinson; James P Holland; David J Weir; David J Deehan
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-11-22       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Do revised hip resurfacing arthroplasties lead to outcomes comparable to those of primary and revised total hip arthroplasties?

Authors:  William Desloges; Isabelle Catelas; Toru Nishiwaki; Paul R Kim; Paul E Beaulé
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Is total hip arthroplasty after hip arthrodesis as good as primary arthroplasty?

Authors:  Mariano Fernandez-Fairen; Antonio Murcia-Mazón; Ana Torres; Virginia Querales; Antonio Murcia
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-11-30       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Fixation of hydroxyapatite-coated revision implants is improved by the surgical technique of cracking the sclerotic bone rim.

Authors:  Brian Elmengaard; Joan E Bechtold; Xinqian Chen; Kjeld Søballe
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.494

Review 8.  Osteoarthritis of the knee.

Authors:  David Scott; Anna Kowalczyk
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2007-09-01

9.  Septic versus aseptic hip revision: how different?

Authors:  Carlo Luca Romanò; Delia Romanò; Nicola Logoluso; Enzo Meani
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2010-09-02

10.  Hip arthrodesis in children: A review of 28 patients.

Authors:  Ashok K Banskota; Shikshya P Shrestha; Bibek Banskota; Binod Bijukacche; Tarun Rajbhandari
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.251

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.