Literature DB >> 18780137

No difference in gender-specific hip replacement outcomes.

Timothy Kostamo1, Robert B Bourne, John Paul Whittaker, Richard W McCalden, Steven J MacDonald.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Gender-specific total hip arthroplasty (THA) design has been recently debated with manufacturers launching gender-based designs. The purpose of this study was to investigate the survivorship and clinical outcomes of a large primary THA cohort specifically assessing differences between genders in clinical outcomes, implant survivorship, revisions as well as sizing and offset differences. We reviewed 3461 consecutive patients receiving 4114 primary THAs (1924 women, 1537 men) between 1980 and 2004 with a minimum of 2 years followup (mean, 11.33 +/- 6.5 years). A subset of patients with complete implant data was reviewed for sizing and offset differences. Preoperative, latest, and change in clinical outcome scores as well as Kaplan-Meier analysis were performed. Men had higher raw clinical outcome scores preoperatively and postoperatively. Differences in change of clinical outcome scores were found only in the WOMAC pain score in favor of the female cohort (39.4 versus 36.1). Survivorship and revision rate were not significantly different. Men used larger stems with greater stem lengths, neck offset, and neck lengths. Current implant systems were sufficiently versatile to address the different size and offset needs of male and female patients. These data suggest there is no apparent need for a gender-designed THA system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18780137      PMCID: PMC2600988          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-008-0466-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  19 in total

1.  Determination of sex from femora.

Authors:  G Mall; M Graw; K Gehring; M Hubig
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2000-09-11       Impact factor: 2.395

2.  Cross-sectional geometry, bone strength, and bone mass in the proximal femur in black and white postmenopausal women.

Authors:  D A Nelson; D A Barondess; S L Hendrix; T J Beck
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 6.741

3.  Triangle identified at the proximal end of femur: a new sex determinant.

Authors:  Ruma Purkait
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2005-01-29       Impact factor: 2.395

4.  An evaluation of sex and body weight determination from the proximal femur using DXA technology and its potential for forensic anthropology.

Authors:  Bruce P Wheatley
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2005-01-29       Impact factor: 2.395

5.  The gender-specific (female) knee.

Authors:  Robert E Booth
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 1.390

6.  Sex and the total knee: gender-sensitive designs.

Authors:  Robert E Booth
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 1.390

7.  Differences between men and women in the rate of use of hip and knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  G A Hawker; J G Wright; P C Coyte; J I Williams; B Harvey; R Glazier; E M Badley
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-04-06       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Race and ethnic variation in proximal femur structure and BMD among older men.

Authors:  Lynn M Marshall; Joseph M Zmuda; Benjamin Ks Chan; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Jane A Cauley; Kristine E Ensrud; Thomas F Lang; Eric S Orwoll
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  Hip structural geometry in old and old-old age: similarities and differences between men and women.

Authors:  Laurel B Yates; David Karasik; Thomas J Beck; L Adrienne Cupples; Douglas P Kiel
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2007-06-15       Impact factor: 4.398

10.  Preoperative function and gender predict pattern of functional recovery after hip and knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Deborah M Kennedy; Steven E Hanna; Paul W Stratford; Jean Wessel; Jeffrey D Gollish
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.757

View more
  16 in total

1.  Evaluation of proximal femoral geometry in plain anterior-posterior radiograph in eastern-Indian population.

Authors:  Sanchita Roy; Rajib Kundu; Shyamalendu Medda; Avanish Gupta; Baljit Kaur Nanrah
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2014-09-20

2.  Improvement of activities of daily living after total hip arthroplasty using a computed tomography-based navigation system.

Authors:  Yuki Maeda; Nobuo Nakamura; Nobuhiko Sugano
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2017-02-27       Impact factor: 1.731

3.  Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty database analysis: is there a winner?

Authors:  Matthew C Lyons; Steven J MacDonald; Lyndsay E Somerville; Douglas D Naudie; Richard W McCalden
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 4.  Do we need gender-specific total joint arthroplasty?

Authors:  Aaron J Johnson; Christopher R Costa; Michael A Mont
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Patient perceived outcomes after primary hip arthroplasty: does gender matter?

Authors:  Carlos J Lavernia; Jose C Alcerro; Juan S Contreras; Mark D Rossi
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  A prospective randomised radiostereometric analysis trial of SmartSet HV and Palacos R bone cements in primary total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Otto S Husby; Kristin Haugan; Pål Benum; Olav A Foss
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2010-03-03

7.  Ethnic and gender differences in the functional disparities after primary total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Atul F Kamath; John G Horneff; Vandy Gaffney; Craig L Israelite; Charles L Nelson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-07-15       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Simultaneous ipsilateral knee arthroscopy and unicondylar knee arthroplasty is effective for bicompartmental symptoms.

Authors:  Akshay Lakra; Taylor Murtaugh; Jeffrey A Geller; William Macaulay; Roshan P Shah
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2017-08-09

9.  Women demonstrate more pain and worse function before THA but comparable results 12 months after surgery.

Authors:  Anne F Mannion; Franco M Impellizzeri; Florian D Naal; Michael Leunig
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  PROGRESSIVE REHABILITATION AFTER TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: A PILOT AND FEASIBILITY STUDY.

Authors:  Kathleen C Madara; Adam Marmon; Moiyad Aljehani; Airelle Hunter-Giordano; Joseph Zeni; Leo Raisis
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2019-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.