Literature DB >> 21116751

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

Mariano Fernandez-Fairen1, Antonio Murcia-Mazón, Ana Torres, Virginia Querales, Antonio Murcia.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Conversion of hip arthrodesis to a THA reportedly provides a reasonable solution, improving function, reducing back and knee pain, and slowing degeneration of neighboring joints associated with a hip fusion. Patients generally are satisfied with conversion despite the fact that range of mobility, muscle strength, leg-length discrepancy (LLD), persistence of limp, and need for assistive walking aids generally are worse than those for conventional primary THA. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We compared THA after hip arthrodesis and primary THA to determine whether these procedures would be associated with similar functional scores, maintenance of scores with time, complications and failures, survivorship of the arthroplasty, and patient satisfaction. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively matched 48 patients undergoing conversion of a fused hip to a THA between January 1980 and January 2000, with 50 patients receiving a primary THA during the same period. We prospectively followed all patients between January 2000 and January 2010. The changes in function and pain after THA were compared between the two cohorts using the Harris hip score (HHS) and the Rosser Index Matrix (RIM). The Oxford hip score (OHS) and the SF-36 also were used to assess quality of life (QOL) during followup. Complications were collected and survivorship of the THA was evaluated. Patient satisfaction was assessed using the Robertsson and Dunbar questionnaire. The minimum followup was 10 years (mean, 17 years; range, 10-29 years).
RESULTS: At last followup, hip function and health-related QOL were similar for patients having conversion of hip arthrodesis to THA and for patients having a routine THA. Scores diminished overall in the two groups between 2000 and 2010, but without a difference for the HHS, RIM QOL, and OHS in the study cohort. The rate of complications, THA survival, and patient satisfaction were similar in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Conversion of hip arthrodesis to a THA provides substantial improvement of hip function and health-related QOL, with an acceptable rate of complications, good expectancy of survival for the arthroplasty, and high level of patient satisfaction comparable to those of primary THA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21116751      PMCID: PMC3111784          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1704-y

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


  77 in total

1.  Interpreting SF-36 summary health measures: a response.

Authors:  J E Ware; M Kosinski
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Comparison of the responsiveness of the Harris Hip Score with generic measures for hip function in osteoarthritis of the hip.

Authors:  H L Hoeksma; C H M Van Den Ende; H K Ronday; A Heering; F C Breedveld
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 19.103

3.  Clinical and radiographic evaluation of total hip replacement. A standard system of terminology for reporting results.

Authors:  R C Johnston; R H Fitzgerald; W H Harris; R Poss; M E Müller; C B Sledge
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  [Population reference values of the Spanish version of the Health Questionnaire SF-36].

Authors:  J Alonso; E Regidor; G Barrio; L Prieto; C Rodríguez; L de la Fuente
Journal:  Med Clin (Barc)       Date:  1998-10-10       Impact factor: 1.725

5.  Effect of femoral head size on wear of the polyethylene acetabular component.

Authors:  J Livermore; D Ilstrup; B Morrey
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Outcome after total hip arthroplasty. Comparison of a traditional disease-specific and a quality-of-life measurement of outcome.

Authors:  J R Lieberman; F Dorey; P Shekelle; L Schumacher; D J Kilgus; B J Thomas; G A Finerman
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 4.757

7.  Orthoroentgenography as a method of measuring the bones of the lower extremities.

Authors:  W T Green; G M Wyatt; M Anderson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1968 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  "Modes of failure" of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening.

Authors:  T A Gruen; G M McNeice; H C Amstutz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1979-06       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 9.  Conversion of hip arthrodesis to total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  K P Panagiotopoulos; G M Robbins; B A Masri; C P Duncan
Journal:  Instr Course Lect       Date:  2001

10.  Patient-reported outcome in total hip replacement. A comparison of five instruments of health status.

Authors:  M Ostendorf; H F van Stel; E Buskens; A J P Schrijvers; L N Marting; A J Verbout; W J A Dhert
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2004-08
View more
  14 in total

1.  Anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty conversion of hip fusion.

Authors:  Caroline Scemama; Vincent Lestrat; Benoit Combourieu; Thierry Judet
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  A Report on Three Consecutive Cases using Computer Tomography 3D Preoperative Planning for Conversion of Arthrodesed Hips to Total Hip Replacements.

Authors:  Yutaka Kuroda; Haruhiko Akiyama; Manabu Nankaku; Kazutaka So; Koji Goto; Shuichi Matsuda
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2015-01-13

Review 3.  Hip fusion takedown to a total hip arthroplasty-is it worth it? A systematic review.

Authors:  Julio J Jauregui; Joseph K Kim; William P Shield; Matthew Harb; Emmanuel M Illical; Farshad Adib; Aditya V Maheshwari
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Long-term results of custom cementless-stem total hip arthroplasty performed in hip fusion.

Authors:  Xavier Flecher; Matthieu Ollivier; Pascal Maman; Sébastien Pesenti; Sébastien Parratte; Jean-Noël Argenson
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-01-19       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Conversion of arthrodesis to total hip arthroplasty: clinical outcome, complications, and prognostic factors of 21 consecutive cases.

Authors:  Manuel Villanueva; Francisco Borja Sobrón; Javier Parra; Jose Manuel Rojo; Francisco Chana; Javier Vaquero
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2013-06-21

Review 6.  Risk Factors and Treatment Options for Failure of a Two-Stage Exchange.

Authors:  Lorenzo Fagotti; Jakub Tatka; Mauro Jose Costa Salles; Marcelo C Queiroz
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2018-09

7.  Ceramic on ceramic hip arthroplasty in fused hips.

Authors:  Kyung-Soon Park; Taek-Rim Yoon; Tae-Min Lee; Yeong-Seub Ahn
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.251

8.  Hip arthrodesis with the anterolateral plate: an innovating technique for an orphaned procedure.

Authors:  Patrick Hoekman; Garba Idé; Akambi Sanoussi Kassoumou; Mahamadou Malam Hayatou
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-20       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Modified Girdlestone arthroplasty and hip arthrodesis using the Ilizarov external fixator as a salvage method in the management of severely infected total hip replacement.

Authors:  Nikolai M Kliushin; Yuri V Ababkov; Artem M Ermakov; Tatiana A Malkova
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.251

10.  Total hip arthroplasty following arthrodesis: a single-center experience of 17 patients.

Authors:  Murat Çalbıyık
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2018-04-11       Impact factor: 2.423

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.