| Literature DB >> 29726298 |
Denis Nam1, Rondek Salih2, Robert L Barrack2, Ryan M Nunley2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: : Prior investigations have shown a decrease in periprosthetic bone mineral density (BMD) of the calcar following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of this investigation was to study proximal femur BMD in a cohort of young, active patients following THA at 1 year postoperatively using a recently introduced stem design.Entities:
Keywords: Activity level; bone density; periprosthetic; stem design; total hip arthroplasty
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29726298 PMCID: PMC6305958 DOI: 10.1177/1120700018761152
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Hip Int ISSN: 1120-7000 Impact factor: 2.135
Figure 1.Radiograph demonstrating the 7 Gruen zones where bone mineral density measurements were performed in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty.
Figure 2.The pain drawing questionnaire completed by study participants.
Clinical characteristics of patients enrolled in this investigation.
| Demographics | |
|---|---|
| Number of patients | 31 |
| Age at surgery (years) | 52.6 ± 6.5 |
| Gender (male/female) | 24/7 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 27.9 ± 3.9 |
| Operative Side (right/left) | 17/14 |
Mean BMD ratios in the proximal femur over time. Mean BMD ratios were compared to the previous time interval in this table. Statistically significant differences are highlighted in bold. BMD, bone mineral density.
| Gruen zone | 6 weeks | 6 months | 1 year | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 100% | 92.8% | <0.0001 | 90.8% | 0.9 |
| 2 | 100% | 97.3% | <0.01 | 94.8% | 0.3 |
| 3 | 100% | 100.2% | 0.8 | 101.4% | 0.2 |
| 4 | 100% | 99.2% | 0.3 | 99.3% | 0.8 |
| 5 | 100% | 99.7% | 0.9 | 100.2% | 0.5 |
| 6 | 100% | 100.6% | 0.7 | 102% | 0.2 |
| 7 | 100% | 97.1% | 0.2 | 100.3% | 0.1 |
Comparison of patient-reported pain in patients receiving the current stem design versus a previously reported investigation using the same methodology. p-values represent comparisons for those reporting moderate to severe pain. p-values in bold are statistically significant.
| Location of Pain | None (0) | Mild (1) | Moderate to Severe (2–5) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Groin | Accolade II | 21 (70%) | 4 (13.3%) | 5 (16.7%) | 0.4 |
| Prior study | 139 (71%) | 36 (18%) | 22 (11%) | ||
| Anterior thigh | Accolade II | 25 (83.3%) | 4 (13.3%) | 1 (3.3%) | 0.1 |
| Prior study | 147 (75%) | 20 (10%) | 31 (15%) | ||
| Lateral thigh | Accolade II | 27 (90%) | 1 (3.3 %) | 2 (6.7%) | 0.7 |
| Prior study | 159 (81%) | 15 (8%) | 23 (12%) | ||
| Lower back | Accolade II | 22 (73.3%) | 5 (16.7%) | 3 (10%) | 0.8 |
| Prior study | 136 (69%) | 21 (11%) | 39 (20%) | ||
| Buttock | Accolade II | 27 (90%) | 2 (6.7%) | 1 (3.3%) | 0.6 |
| Prior study | 164 (84%) | 15 (8%) | 17 (9%) | ||
| Posterior thigh | Accolade II | 28 (93.3%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (6.7%) | 0.9 |
| Prior study | 181 (92%) | 9 (5%) | 6 (3%) | ||
| Trochanteric | Accolade II | 22 (73.3%) | 3 (10%) | 5 (16.7%) | 0.9 |
| Prior study | 123 (63%) | 39 (20%) | 34 (17%) |