| Literature DB >> 33172433 |
Weizhou Jiang1, Jun Xiao1, Bin Chen1, Ming Jia2, Yang Zhang1, Jian Wang1, Zhanjun Shi3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many motion studies have shown that the inner bearing of bipolar prostheses moves less than expected under non-weight-bearing and static weight-bearing positions, which are not routine functional movements performed postoperatively. The aim of this study was to investigate the behaviours of bipolar prostheses during normal gait and simulative squatting.Entities:
Keywords: Bipolar hemiarthroplasty; Femoral neck fractures; Inner bearing; Motion; Osteoarthritis; Outer bearing; Treadmill
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33172433 PMCID: PMC7656722 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-020-03749-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Fig. 1Weight-bearing simulative squat motion examination. The patients were requested to stand on the examination board with their buttocks and heels in contact with the board, which was perpendicular to the ground. Then, the patients were asked to squat down slowly and then return to the upright posture. The speed of these movements matched the speed of the X-ray tube, and fluoroscopic video imaging was performed in the sagittal plane
Fig. 2Weight-bearing normal gait motion examination. The patients were asked to stand on the treadmill and then to walk on it at a normal pace. Fluoroscopic video imaging was conducted in the sagittal plane
Fig. 3Measurements of the degree of joint motion of the bipolar prosthesis. According to the method described by Drinker and Murray (1979), the anteroposterior view was used to evaluate the abduction-adduction motion (a) and the lateral view was used to evaluate the flexion-extension motion (b): line 1 is parallel to the straight lateral edge of the outer cup, line 2 passes through the middle of the neck of the prosthesis, and line 3 is the acetabular index in the anteroposterior view and an extension of the upper margin of the sacrum in the lateral view. Angle 1–2 = inner motion; angle 1–3 = outer motion; angle 2–3 = total motion
General characteristics of the enrolled patients
| Patient characteristics | ( |
|---|---|
| Males, n (%) | 10 (32.3%) |
| Age a (y): mean (SD); range | 78.84 (6.02); 67 to 91 |
| Follow-up time (mo): mean (SD); range | 39.74 (26.38); 7 to 105 |
| HHS score b: mean (SD); range | 77.93 ± 15.90 (45.23–98.94) |
| EQ-5D score b: mean (SD); range | 0.72 ± 0.10 (0.532–0.848) |
| Osteolysis b, n (%) | 6 (19.4%) |
| Femoral stem loosening b, n (%) | 5 (16.1%) |
| Fixed implant b, n (%) | 20 (64.5%) |
| Migration of the bipolar head b (mm): mean (SD); range | 2.26 (1.52); 0.38 to 6.45 |
Abbreviation: n number of cases, y years, SD standard deviation, mo month, mm millimetres, HHS Harris Hip Score, EQ-5D EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire
a at the time of surgery
b at the time of the follow-up
Outcomes of the motion indexes during 4 different motion examinations
| Amount of Motion (degrees) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total, mean (SD) | At the Outer Bearing, mean (SD) | At the Inner Bearing, mean (SD) | O/I Ratio | |
| 34.78 (9.64) | 30.03 (9.40) | 4.75 (4.02) | 6.32 | |
| 69.86 (12.49) | 57.36 (14.41) | 12.50 (12.25) | 4.59 | |
| 50.18 (13.75) | 43.99 (16.34) | 6.19 (9.46) | 7.11 | |
| 39.39 (8.57) | 17.64 (13.39) | 21.74 (14.47) | 0.81 | |
Abbreviation: O/I Ratio the ratio of outer/inner bearing motions
Fig. 4Motion distributions in 4 subgroups during the 4 motion examinations. *: There were no significant differences in the mean total motion among the groups during each specific examination, except that in Group C was larger than that in Group B during the weight-bearing simulative squat examination (57.18° vs. 43.22°, P = 0.017). We believe that these differences may be due to individual differences across the enrolled patients. In cases where acetabular protrusion is absent, acetabular wear may change the behaviour of the bipolar prosthesis but may not significantly affect the normal range of motion of the hip. a. During non-weight-bearing abduction-adduction, the degrees of motion of the outer bearing were 32.44, 24.46, 30.49 and 33.79 in Groups A, B, C and D, respectively; the degrees of motion of the inner bearing were 3.03, 4.84, 5.28 and 5.67 in Groups A, B, C and D, respectively. b. During non-weight-bearing flexion-extension, the degrees of motion of the outer bearing were 62.93, 57.35, 54.89 and 54.66 in Groups A, B, C and D, respectively; the degrees of motion of the inner bearing were 4.62, 15.51, 19.18 and 10.16 in Groups A, B, C and D, respectively. c. During the weight-bearing simulative squat motion, the degrees of motion of the outer bearing were 45.59, 39.84, 44.19 and 47.09 in Groups A, B, C and D, respectively; the degrees of motion of the inner bearing were 1.66, 3.38, 12.99 and 7.35 in Groups A, B, C and D, respectively. d. During the weight-bearing normal gait motion, the degrees of motion of the outer bearing were 33.89, 14.09, 7.49 and 16.32 in Groups A, B, C and D, respectively; the degrees of motion of the inner bearing were 4.41, 22.89, 32.31 and 26.36 in Groups A, B, C and D, respectively
Fig. 5The O/I ratios in 4 subgroups during the 4 motion examinations. During non-weight-bearing abduction-adduction, the O/I ratios were 10.71, 5.05, 5.77 and 5.96 in Groups A, B, C and D, respectively; during non-weight-bearing flexion-extension, the O/I ratios were 13.62, 3.70, 2.87 and 5.38 in Groups A, B, C and D, respectively; during the weight-bearing simulative squat motion, the O/I ratios were 27.46, 11.79, 3.40 and 6.41 in Groups A, B, C and D, respectively; during the weight-bearing normal gait motion, the O/I ratios were 7.68, 0.62, 0.23 and 0.62 in Groups A, B, C and D, respectively. The corresponding O/I ratios among the groups showed a trend of decreasing first and then increasing
Comparison of efficacy outcomes at the time of the follow-up
| HHS | EQ-5D | Distance of migration (mm) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 73.17 ± 13.19 | 0.659 ± 0.799 | 2.76 ± 1.31 | |
| 54.08 ± 7.66 | 0.670 ± 0.116 | 1.83 ± 0.79 | |
| 85.33 ± 11.26 | 0.752 ± 0.085 | 2.21 ± 1.71 |
Abbreviation: HHS Harris Hip Score, EQ-5D EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire, mm millimetres