Literature DB >> 29481346

Do Stem Design and Surgical Approach Influence Early Aseptic Loosening in Cementless THA?

Loes Janssen1, Karolina A P Wijnands, Dennis Janssen, Michiel W H E Janssen, Jan W Morrenhof.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Some studies have revealed an increased risk of early aseptic loosening of cementless stems in THA when inserted through an anterior or anterolateral approach compared with a posterior approach, whereas approach does not appear to be a risk factor in others. Stem design, whether "anatomic" (that is, stems with a curved lateral profile or an obtuse angle at the proximal-lateral portion of the stem) or "shoulder" (that is, straight with a proximal shoulder), may also be associated with a differential risk of aseptic loosening in cementless THA depending on the surgical approach used, but if so, this risk is not well characterized. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this national registry study, we investigated the association between surgical approach and early aseptic loosening of (1) cementless femoral stems with a proximal angular shape (shoulder); and (2) anatomically shaped femoral stems.
METHODS: The Dutch Arthroplasty Registry is a nationwide population-based register recording data on primary and revision hip arthroplasty. We selected all primary THAs (n = 63,354) with a cementless femoral stem inserted through an anterior, anterolateral, or posterior approach from 2007 to 2013 with a minimal followup of 2 years. Femoral stems were classified as "anatomic," "shoulder," or "other" (that is, not classifiable as anatomic or shoulder). From the 47,372 THAs with an anatomic or shoulder stem (mean followup, 3.5 years; SD, 1.8 years), 340 (0.7%) underwent revision surgery as a result of aseptic loosening of the femoral stem, 1195 (2.5%) were revised for other reasons, and 1558 patients (3.3%) died. We used Cox proportional hazard models to determine hazard ratios for aseptic loosening of anatomic and shoulder stems for the anterolateral and anterior approaches compared with the posterior approach.
RESULTS: After controlling for relevant confounding variables such as sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, previous surgery, and coating and material of the femoral stem, we found that there was a stem-approach interaction. Separate analysis showed that shoulder stems had a greater likelihood of early aseptic loosening when the anterolateral approach (hazard ratio [HR], 2.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-3.63; p < 0.001) or anterior approach (HR, 10.47; 95% CI, 2.55-43.10; p = 0.001) was used compared with the posterior approach. Separate analysis of the anatomic stems yielded no association with approach (anterolateral: HR, 1.07, 95% CI, 0.70-1.63, p = 0.77; anterior: HR, 1.31, 95% CI, 0.91-1.89, p = 0.15).
CONCLUSIONS: In THA, cementless femoral stems with a proximal shoulder are associated with early aseptic loosening when inserted through an anterior or anterolateral approach compared with a posterior approach. An anatomically shaped stem may be preferred with these approaches, although further analysis with larger registry volumes should confirm our results, in particular for shouldered stems when implanted through an anterior approach. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29481346      PMCID: PMC6263580          DOI: 10.1007/s11999.0000000000000208

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


  24 in total

1.  Relaxing the rule of ten events per variable in logistic and Cox regression.

Authors:  Eric Vittinghoff; Charles E McCulloch
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-12-20       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 2.  Complications of the direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Cefin Barton; Paul R Kim
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.472

3.  Anterior and Anterolateral Approaches for THA Are Associated With Lower Dislocation Risk Without Higher Revision Risk.

Authors:  Dhiren Sheth; Guy Cafri; Maria C S Inacio; Elizabeth W Paxton; Robert S Namba
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  The Direct Anterior Approach is Associated With Early Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Shuichi Eto; Katherine Hwang; James I Huddleston; Derek F Amanatullah; William J Maloney; Stuart B Goodman
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2016-10-08       Impact factor: 4.757

5.  Which approach for total hip arthroplasty: anterolateral or posterior?

Authors:  Jeya Palan; David J Beard; David W Murray; J G Andrew; John Nolan
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-10-22       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Contemporary Surgical Indications and Referral Trends in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A 10-Year Review.

Authors:  Jacob A Haynes; Jeffrey B Stambough; Adam A Sassoon; Staci R Johnson; John C Clohisy; Ryan M Nunley
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2015-09-26       Impact factor: 4.757

7.  The design of the acetabular component and size of the femoral head influence the risk of revision following 34 721 single-brand cemented hip replacements: a retrospective cohort study of medium-term data from a National Joint Registry.

Authors:  S S Jameson; P N Baker; J Mason; P J Gregg; N Brewster; D J Deehan; M R Reed
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2012-12

8.  Femoral stem tip orientation and surgical approach in total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  P D Vaughan; P J Singh; R Teare; R Kucheria; G C Singer
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2007 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 1.756

9.  The type of surgical approach influences the risk of revision in total hip arthroplasty: a study from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register of 90,662 total hipreplacements with 3 different cemented prostheses.

Authors:  Viktor Lindgren; Göran Garellick; Johan Kärrholm; Per Wretenberg
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2012-11-01       Impact factor: 3.717

10.  More than 95% completeness of reported procedures in the population-based Dutch Arthroplasty Register.

Authors:  Liza N van Steenbergen; Geke A W Denissen; Anneke Spooren; Stephanie M van Rooden; Frank J van Oosterhout; Jan W Morrenhof; Rob G H H Nelissen
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2015-03-11       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  13 in total

1.  Incidence and risk factors of in-hospital prosthesis-related complications following total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective Nationwide Inpatient Sample database study.

Authors:  Qinfeng Yang; Jian Wang; Yichuan Xu; Yuhang Chen; Qiang Lian; Yang Zhang
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2020-06-27       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  CORR Insights®: Do Stem Design and Surgical Approach Influence Early Aseptic Loosening in Cementless THA?

Authors:  Nicholas J Giori
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Cementless total hip arthroplasty with anatomic-shaped implants. Does the minimal invasive anterolateral technique influence the stem position or subsidence in contrast to the standard lateral approach?

Authors:  Nils Wirries; Marcus Örgel; Michael Schwarze; Stefan Budde; Henning Windhagen; Michael Skutek
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-08-14       Impact factor: 2.928

4.  How Does Implant Survivorship Vary with Different Corail Femoral Stem Variants? Results of 51,212 Cases with Up to 30 Years Of Follow-up from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.

Authors:  Silje Marie Melbye; Sofie Cecilia Dietrich Haug; Anne Marie Fenstad; Ove Furnes; Jan-Erik Gjertsen; Geir Hallan
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 4.755

5.  Good long-term outcomes for Direct Anterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty in South Africa.

Authors:  Jurek Rafal Tomasz Pietrzak; Zia Maharaj; Josip Nenad Cakic
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2020-08-28

Review 6.  Effect of risedronate on femoral periprosthetic bone loss following total hip replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Liang Ren; Weidong Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 1.889

7.  A Complication-Based Comparison Between the Posterior and Direct Lateral Approaches to Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Single-Center Experience.

Authors:  Wazzan ALJuhani; Khalid Alshuwaier; Fisal Alkhamis; Mohammed Q Alosaimi; Abdullah Alaidroos; Mohammad A Alghafees; Emad Masuadi
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2021-01-04

8.  Early postoperative clinical recovery of robotic arm-assisted vs. image-based navigated Total hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Nao Shibanuma; Kazunari Ishida; Tomoyuki Matsumoto; Koji Takayama; Yutaro Sanada; Masahiro Kurosaka; Ryosuke Kuroda; Shinya Hayashi
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 2.362

9.  No Difference in Functional, Radiographic, and Survivorship Outcomes Between Direct Anterior or Posterior Approach THA: 5-Year Results of a Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Mithun Nambiar; Tze E Cheng; James R Onggo; Julian Maingard; John Troupis; Alun Pope; Michael S Armstrong; Parminder J Singh
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 4.755

10.  Clinical and radiologic outcomes in patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty with Collum Femoris Preserving stems: a comparison between the direct anterior approach and the posterior approach.

Authors:  Bingshi Zhang; Sikai Liu; Zeming Liu; Bo Liu; Jia Huo; Mengnan Li; Yongtai Han
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-01-22       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.