Literature DB >> 18839366

A clinical and radiographic 13-year follow-up study of 138 Charnley hip arthroplasties in patients 50-70 years old: comparison of university hospital data and registry data.

Gunn Hulleberg1, Arild Aamodt, Birgitte Espehaug, Pål Benum.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Arthroplasty registers provide rates of implant survival in large populations based on implant revision. In an unrevised prosthesis population, some patients may have implants with clinically poor outcome or radiographic failure. We therefore evaluated medium-term clinical and radiographic results in patients with charnley hip arthroplasties and compared our results with data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 1989 through 1991, 138 Charnley arthroplasties with plain Palacos cement were performed in 123 patients who were 50-70 years old. At follow-up after 13 (12-15) years, 26 patients had died (28 hips). The 84 unrevised patients (93 hips) were interviewed and underwent clinical and radiographic assessment. Prosthesis survival was estimated by the Kaplan- Meier method.
RESULTS: At follow-up, 83% of the patients were completely satisfied with their hip replacement. Mean Harris hip score (HHS) was 83 (SD 15), mean EQ-5D index was 0.75 (SD 0.24) and mean EQ-VAS score was 69 (SD 21). Most clinical assessments had poorer scores for Charnley category C (n = 47) than for Charnley category A + B (n = 46). Function, according to Charnley's modified Merle d'Aubigne and Postel scoring system, was improved compared to preoperative values. The survival at 10 years was 89% (95% CI: 84-95) and at 13 years it was 85% (95% CI: 79-92) with revision for any reason as endpoint. In addition to 20 revised hips, 8 implants were radiographically loose and 13 hips had HHS < 70, giving a clinical success rate of 76%. Only 4 primary operations (0.8%) had not been reported to the NAR, but all revisions had been reported.
INTERPRETATION: Clinical follow-up studies give essential information that is additional to that gained from revision-based outcome studies. To fully appreciate the clinical effectiveness of an implant, specific hip function, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and radiographic analysis must also be considered. The functional status of the patient has an important influence on the clinical outcome after hip replacement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18839366     DOI: 10.1080/17453670810016614

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Orthop        ISSN: 1745-3674            Impact factor:   3.717


  9 in total

Review 1.  Surgical management of hip osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Rajiv Gandhi; Anthony V Perruccio; Nizar N Mahomed
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2013-10-21       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Total hip replacement with a collarless polished cemented anatomic stem: clinical and gait analysis results at ten years follow-up.

Authors:  Arthur Grzesiak; Kamiar Aminian; Estelle Lécureux; Florence Jobin; Brigitte M Jolles
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-12-19       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Good results with cemented total hip arthroplasty in patients between 40 and 50 years of age.

Authors:  Daniël C J de Kam; Jean W M Gardeniers; René P H Veth; B Willem Schreurs
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.717

4.  No differences in outcomes between cemented and uncemented acetabular components after 12-14 years: results from a randomized controlled trial comparing Duraloc with Charnley cups.

Authors:  Kristian Bjørgul; Wendy M Novicoff; S T Andersen; K Brevig; F Thu; M Wiig; O Ahlund
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2010-03-03

Review 5.  Hip resurfacing versus total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review comparing standardized outcomes.

Authors:  Deborah A Marshall; Karen Pykerman; Jason Werle; Diane Lorenzetti; Tracy Wasylak; Tom Noseworthy; Donald A Dick; Greg O'Connor; Aish Sundaram; Sanne Heintzbergen; Cy Frank
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Quality of life and functionality after total hip arthroplasty: a long-term follow-up study.

Authors:  Massimo Mariconda; Olimpio Galasso; Giovan Giuseppe Costa; Pasquale Recano; Simone Cerbasi
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2011-10-06       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  Is reverse hybrid hip replacement the solution?

Authors:  Einar Lindalen; Leif I Havelin; Lars Nordsletten; Eva Dybvik; Anne M Fenstad; Geir Hallan; Ove Furnes; Oystein Høvik; Stephan M Röhrl
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2011-10-17       Impact factor: 3.717

8.  Women in Charnley class C fail to improve in mobility to a higher degree after total hip replacement.

Authors:  Max Gordon; Paolo Frumento; Olof Sköldenberg; Meridith Greene; Göran Garellick; Ola Rolfson
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2014-06-23       Impact factor: 3.717

9.  18 years of results with cemented primary hip prostheses in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register: concerns about some newer implants.

Authors:  Birgitte Espehaug; Ove Furnes; Lars B Engesaeter; Leif I Havelin
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.717

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.