Literature DB >> 27694588

The influence of cemented femoral stem choice on the incidence of revision for periprosthetic fracture after primary total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of national joint registry data.

J Palan1, M C Smith2, P Gregg3, S Mellon4, A Kulkarni5, K Tucker, A W Blom2, D W Murray6, H Pandit6.   

Abstract

AIMS: Periprosthetic fracture (PF) after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an uncommon but potentially devastating complication. This study aims to investigate the influence of cemented stem designs on the risk of needing a revision for a PF. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed data on 257 202 primary THAs with cemented stems and 390 linked first revisions for PF recorded in the National Joint Registry (NJR) of England, Wales and Northern Ireland to determine if a cemented femoral stem brand was associated with the risk of having revision for a PF after primary THA. All cemented femoral stem brands with more than 10 000 primary operations recorded in the NJR were identified. The four most commonly used cemented femoral stems were the Exeter V40 (n = 146 409), CPT (n = 24 300), C-Stem (n = 15 113) and Charnley (n = 20 182). We compared the revision risk ratios due to PF amongst the stems using a Poisson regression model adjusting for patient factors. Compared with the Exeter V40, the age, gender and ASA grade adjusted revision rate ratio was 3.89 for the cemented CPT stem (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.07 to 4.93), 0.89 for the C-Stem (95% CI 0.57 to 1.41) and 0.41 for the Charnley stem (95% CI 0.24 to 0.70).
CONCLUSIONS: The limitations of the study include incomplete data capture, analysis of only PF requiring revision and that observation does not imply causality. Nevertheless, this study demonstrates that the choice of a cemented stem may influence the risk of revision for PF. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1347-54. ©2016 The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Fixation; Periprosthetic fracture; Revision; Stem design; Total hip arthroplasty

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27694588     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.98B10.36534

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone Joint J        ISSN: 2049-4394            Impact factor:   5.082


  11 in total

1.  A higher degree of polyethylene irradiation is associated with a reduced risk of revision for aseptic loosening in total hip arthroplasties using cemented acetabular components: an analysis of 290,770 cases from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Island and the Isle of Man.

Authors:  Edward T Davis; Joseph Pagkalos; Branko Kopjar
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2020-09-20       Impact factor: 5.853

2.  Not all cemented hips are the same: a register-based (NJR) comparison of taper-slip and composite beam femoral stems.

Authors:  Hussain A Kazi; Sarah L Whitehouse; Jonathan R Howell; A John Timperley
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 3.717

3.  The design of the cemented stem influences the risk of Vancouver type B fractures, but not of type C: an analysis of 82,837 Lubinus SPII and Exeter Polished stems.

Authors:  Georgios Chatziagorou; Hans Lindahl; Johan Kärrholm
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2019-02-11       Impact factor: 3.717

4.  Long-term follow-up outcomes for patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty with uncemented versus cemented femoral components: a retrospective observational study with a 5-year minimum follow-up.

Authors:  Tiejian Liu; Xiaoxiao Hua; Weiguang Yu; Jinluan Lin; Mingdong Zhao; Jun Liu; Xianshang Zeng
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2019-11-15       Impact factor: 2.359

5.  Factors affecting the incidence of postoperative periprosthetic fractures following primary and revision hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Christos Bissias; Angelos Kaspiris; Athanasios Kalogeropoulos; Konstantinos Papoutsis; Nikolaos Natsioulas; Konstantinos Barbagiannis; Panayiotis J Papagelopoulos; Olga D Savvidou
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 2.359

6.  Prevention of early complications following total hip replacement.

Authors:  Andreas Fontalis; Daniel J Berry; Andrew Shimmin; Pablo A Slullitel; Martin A Buttaro; Cao Li; Henrik Malchau; Fares S Haddad
Journal:  SICOT J       Date:  2021-11-30

7.  Comparison of periprosthetic femoral fracture torque and strain pattern of three types of femoral components in experimental model.

Authors:  Yasuhiko Takegami; Taisuke Seki; Yusuke Osawa; Shiro Imagama
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2022-05       Impact factor: 4.410

8.  Fixation, sex, and age: highest risk of revision for uncemented stems in elderly women - data from 66,995 primary total hip arthroplasties in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.

Authors:  Håvard Dale; Sjur Børsheim; Torbjørn Berge Kristensen; Anne Marie Fenstad; Jan-Erik Gjertsen; Geir Hallan; Stein Atle Lie; Ove Furnes
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2019-10-30       Impact factor: 3.717

9.  The effects of cement fixation on survival in elderly patients with hip hemiarthroplasty: a nationwide cohort study.

Authors:  Ming-Che Tsai; Yee-Yung Ng; Wei-Ming Chen; Shang-Wen Tsai; Shiao-Chi Wu
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2019-12-27       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Cemented versus uncemented total hip replacement for femoral neck fractures in elderly patients: a retrospective, multicentre study with a mean 5-year follow-up.

Authors:  Shuai Mao; Baomin Chen; Ying Zhu; Liang Qian; Jinluan Lin; Xinchao Zhang; Weiguang Yu; Guowei Han
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 2.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.