Literature DB >> 22425305

Revision total hip arthroplasty in patients 80 years or older.

Anne Lübbeke1, Constantinos Roussos, Christophe Barea, Werner Köhnlein, Pierre Hoffmeyer.   

Abstract

We evaluated all revisions performed from March 1996 to December 2008 and compared complications, mortality, and clinical outcomes between patients 80 years and older and patients younger than 80 years. Data were collected prospectively. There were 325 revisions, 84 (25.8%) in patients 80 years and older and 241 in patients younger than 80 years (62% revision for aseptic loosening in both groups). The mean follow-up was 4.3 years. The results, 80 years and older vs younger than 80 years, revealed the following: mortality, 5% vs 0% 3 months postoperatively; medical complications in 23.8% vs 6.2%; postoperative fractures, 9.5% vs 2.5%; and improved Merle d'Aubigné scores from 9.6 to 13.0 vs 10.4 to 14.3. Revision total hip arthroplasty in patients 80 years and older was associated with substantial clinical improvement and patient satisfaction. However, medical complications and 90-day mortality were higher, and postoperative fractures occurred more frequently.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22425305     DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.11.023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  7 in total

1.  High Risk of Readmission in Octogenarians Undergoing Primary Hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Arthur L Malkani; Brian Dilworth; Kevin Ong; Doruk Baykal; Edmund Lau; Theresa N Mackin; Gwo-Chin Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Cemented total hip arthroplasty revisions in patients of eighty years and older.

Authors:  Martijn A J te Stroet; Sushma A Ghisai; J Christiaan Keurentjes; Wim H C Rijnen; Jean W M Gardeniers; Albert Van Kampen; B Willem Schreurs
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-04-12       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 3.  Risk of revision and dislocation in single, dual mobility and large femoral head total hip arthroplasty: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kwanchai Pituckanotai; Alisara Arirachakaran; Harit Tuchinda; Chinundorn Putananon; Nitiphol Nualsalee; Kittipong Setrkraising; Jatupon Kongtharvonskul
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2017-11-08

4.  Re-revision total hip arthroplasty: Epidemiology and factors associated with outcomes.

Authors:  S Yu; H Saleh; N Bolz; J Buza; R Iorio; P A Rathod; R Schwarzkopf; A J Deshmukh
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2018-08-28

5.  Cup revision involving retention of a fixed but malpositioned acetabular component in patients with poor general conditions.

Authors:  Weiping Su; Min Zeng; Yihe Hu; Jianxi Zhu; Long Wang; Jie Xie
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 1.889

6.  What Is the Dislocation and Revision Rate of Dual-mobility Cups Used in Complex Revision THAs?

Authors:  Niklas Unter Ecker; Hakan Kocaoğlu; Akos Zahar; Carl Haasper; Thorsten Gehrke; Mustafa Citak
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 4.755

7.  Open subpectoral biceps tenodesis in patients over 65 does not result in an increased rate of complications.

Authors:  Andreas Voss; Simone Cerciello; Jessica DiVenere; Olga Solovyova; Felix Dyrna; John Apostolakos; David Lam; Mark P Cote; Knut Beitzel; Augustus D Mazzocca
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 2.362

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.