BACKGROUND: The primary aim was to evaluate the outcome of short-stem hip prostheses in terms of overall revision rates. Data were taken from published literature and national arthroplasty registers. The second study aim was to evaluate a potentially superior outcome of dependent compared to independent clinical studies. METHODS: All clinical studies on short-stem hip prostheses between 2006 and 2016 were reviewed and evaluated with a special interest on revision rates. Revision rate was calculated as "revision per 100 component years." Short stems were divided into femoral neck retaining (NR), neck sparing (NS), and neck harming (NH) prostheses. Published literature was further classified into dependent and independent studies, and data were compared to the Australian National Arthroplasty Register. RESULTS: Fifty-two studies with 56 cohorts met the inclusion criteria and were therefore included in our study. All clinical studies showed a median revision rate of 4.8% after 10 years. NS and NH stems performed equally, whereas neck retaining prostheses were significantly inferior. Independent showed higher revision rates compared to dependent data without being statistically significant. The Australian register revealed a revision rate of 6.6% after one decade. CONCLUSION: Similar low revision rates for NS and NH short-stem prostheses were found in the included data. Dependent studies seem not to be biased with regard to the longevity of short-stem hip replacement. Longer follow-up periods in clinical studies and more detailed information in arthroplasty registers would be desirable for future studies.
BACKGROUND: The primary aim was to evaluate the outcome of short-stem hip prostheses in terms of overall revision rates. Data were taken from published literature and national arthroplasty registers. The second study aim was to evaluate a potentially superior outcome of dependent compared to independent clinical studies. METHODS: All clinical studies on short-stem hip prostheses between 2006 and 2016 were reviewed and evaluated with a special interest on revision rates. Revision rate was calculated as "revision per 100 component years." Short stems were divided into femoral neck retaining (NR), neck sparing (NS), and neck harming (NH) prostheses. Published literature was further classified into dependent and independent studies, and data were compared to the Australian National Arthroplasty Register. RESULTS: Fifty-two studies with 56 cohorts met the inclusion criteria and were therefore included in our study. All clinical studies showed a median revision rate of 4.8% after 10 years. NS and NH stems performed equally, whereas neck retaining prostheses were significantly inferior. Independent showed higher revision rates compared to dependent data without being statistically significant. The Australian register revealed a revision rate of 6.6% after one decade. CONCLUSION: Similar low revision rates for NS and NH short-stem prostheses were found in the included data. Dependent studies seem not to be biased with regard to the longevity of short-stem hip replacement. Longer follow-up periods in clinical studies and more detailed information in arthroplasty registers would be desirable for future studies.
Authors: Lars V von Engelhardt; Andreas Breil-Wirth; Christian Kothny; Jörn Bengt Seeger; Christian Grasselli; Joerg Jerosch Journal: World J Orthop Date: 2018-10-18