S Walters1, A Prasad2, B Guevel1, K M Sarraf3, P Achan4, S Dawson-Bowling4, S Millington4, S A Hanna5. 1. Health Education England, London, UK. 2. Imperial College London, London, UK. 3. Imperial Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK. 4. Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK. 5. Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK. Sammy.Hanna@bartshealth.nhs.uk.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with radiation-related changes to the bone, and specifically whether there is a difference in outcomes between cemented and uncemented acetabular components. METHODS: A database search was performed to identify available studies reporting adults undergoing THA who have previously had pelvic irradiation. Data were extracted and analysed with respect to the use of cemented versus uncemented acetabular components. Statistical analysis was performed using the Chi-square test for independence. RESULTS: The all-cause revision rate was 24% in the cemented THA group (27/111), compared with 15% of uncemented THAs (22/143) (p = 0.073). Revision for acetabular aseptic loosening occurred in 16% of cases (18/111) in the cemented group and 10% (15/143) in the uncemented group (p = 0.178). Acetabular aseptic loosening was reported in 24% of cemented THAs (27/111) and 14% of uncemented THAs (20/143), which was statistically significant (p = 0.035). Not all of these went on to have revision THA. The Incidence of prosthetic joint infection was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Overall outcomes appear to be better for uncemented THAs in post-radiotherapy patients, with a significantly lower rate of aseptic loosening and an appreciable (but not statistically significant) reduction in revision rate. The best outcomes seem to be associated with the use of acetabular reinforcement across both cemented and uncemented groups, but further work is needed to evaluate this.
PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with radiation-related changes to the bone, and specifically whether there is a difference in outcomes between cemented and uncemented acetabular components. METHODS: A database search was performed to identify available studies reporting adults undergoing THA who have previously had pelvic irradiation. Data were extracted and analysed with respect to the use of cemented versus uncemented acetabular components. Statistical analysis was performed using the Chi-square test for independence. RESULTS: The all-cause revision rate was 24% in the cemented THA group (27/111), compared with 15% of uncemented THAs (22/143) (p = 0.073). Revision for acetabular aseptic loosening occurred in 16% of cases (18/111) in the cemented group and 10% (15/143) in the uncemented group (p = 0.178). Acetabular aseptic loosening was reported in 24% of cemented THAs (27/111) and 14% of uncemented THAs (20/143), which was statistically significant (p = 0.035). Not all of these went on to have revision THA. The Incidence of prosthetic joint infection was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Overall outcomes appear to be better for uncemented THAs in post-radiotherapy patients, with a significantly lower rate of aseptic loosening and an appreciable (but not statistically significant) reduction in revision rate. The best outcomes seem to be associated with the use of acetabular reinforcement across both cemented and uncemented groups, but further work is needed to evaluate this.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cemented; Irradiation; Radiation; Radiotherapy; THA; THR; Total hip arthroplasty; Total hip replacement; Uncemented
Authors: John Patrick Connors; Patrick Garvin; Jacob Silver; Adam Lindsay; Olga Solovyova Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2022-08-19 Impact factor: 2.928