Benjamin Buecking1, Christoph Kolja Boese2, Verena Anna Bergmeister1, Michael Frink1, Steffen Ruchholtz1, Philipp Lechler3. 1. Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany. 2. Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. 3. Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany. lechler@med.uni-marburg.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Inadequate reconstruction of femoral offset after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is associated with unfavourable outcomes, but its importance following hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fracture is unknown. METHODS: Our study examined the correlation between reconstructed femoral offset and functional outcome 12 months after post traumatic hemiarthroplasty in 126 prospectively enrolled elderly patients. Rotation-corrected femoral offset (FORC), relative femoral offset (FORL) and contralateral femoral offset (FOC) were measured on anteroposterior radiographs. The Harris Hip Score (HHS) was the primary outcome measure; the timed up and go (TUG) test and Lawton instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) score were secondary outcomes. Correlations were sought using the Spearman correlation coefficient (r). Sample size was calculated using an Altman nomogram, with the power set at 80 %, the significance level of 0.05 and a standardised difference of 0.75. RESULTS: The mean reconstructed FORC was 41 mm (17-67 mm) and showed a linear relationship and excellent correlation with the FOC. At 12 months, we found a significant positive correlation between FORC and HHS (r = 0.303, p = 0.025) and IADL (r = 0.325, p = 0.013), but not TUG (r = -0.026, p = 0.863). These findings were confirmed by bivariate and multivariate correlation between FORL and functional outcome parameters. CONCLUSIONS: We found a clinically relevant relationship between femoral offset and functional outcome after hemiarthroplasty in elderly patients, comparable with that of THA, for treating osteoarthritis.
PURPOSE: Inadequate reconstruction of femoral offset after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is associated with unfavourable outcomes, but its importance following hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fracture is unknown. METHODS: Our study examined the correlation between reconstructed femoral offset and functional outcome 12 months after post traumatic hemiarthroplasty in 126 prospectively enrolled elderly patients. Rotation-corrected femoral offset (FORC), relative femoral offset (FORL) and contralateral femoral offset (FOC) were measured on anteroposterior radiographs. The Harris Hip Score (HHS) was the primary outcome measure; the timed up and go (TUG) test and Lawton instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) score were secondary outcomes. Correlations were sought using the Spearman correlation coefficient (r). Sample size was calculated using an Altman nomogram, with the power set at 80 %, the significance level of 0.05 and a standardised difference of 0.75. RESULTS: The mean reconstructed FORC was 41 mm (17-67 mm) and showed a linear relationship and excellent correlation with the FOC. At 12 months, we found a significant positive correlation between FORC and HHS (r = 0.303, p = 0.025) and IADL (r = 0.325, p = 0.013), but not TUG (r = -0.026, p = 0.863). These findings were confirmed by bivariate and multivariate correlation between FORL and functional outcome parameters. CONCLUSIONS: We found a clinically relevant relationship between femoral offset and functional outcome after hemiarthroplasty in elderly patients, comparable with that of THA, for treating osteoarthritis.
Authors: Christoph Kolja Boese; Benjamin Buecking; Tim Schwarting; Florian Debus; Steffen Ruchholtz; Christoph Bliemel; Michael Frink; Philipp Lechler Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2015-01-21 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Carl Johan Hedbeck; Richard Blomfeldt; Gunilla Lapidus; Hans Törnkvist; Sari Ponzer; Jan Tidermark Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2011-02-08 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Markus Weber; Michael L Woerner; Hans-Robert Springorum; Alexander Hapfelmeier; Joachim Grifka; Tobias F Renkawitz Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Paul T P W Burgers; Arnoud R Van Geene; Michel P J Van den Bekerom; Esther M M Van Lieshout; Bastiaan Blom; Ilyas S Aleem; M Bhandari; Rudolf W Poolman Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2012-05-24 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Christoph Kolja Boese; Jens Dargel; Johannes Oppermann; Peer Eysel; Max Joseph Scheyerer; Jan Bredow; Philipp Lechler Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2015-08-25 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Jacob Shapira; Sarah L Chen; Philip J Rosinsky; David R Maldonado; Mitchell Meghpara; Ajay C Lall; Benjamin G Domb Journal: J Orthop Date: 2020-03-28
Authors: Max P L van der Sijp; Inger B Schipper; Stefan B Keizer; Pieta Krijnen; Arthur H P Niggebrugge Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Robert Döring; Thorsten Jentzsch; Max J Scheyerer; William Pfäffli; Clément M L Werner Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2016-05-23 Impact factor: 2.362