| Literature DB >> 34568493 |
Chun-Yen Chen1, Chin-Jung Hsu1,2, Tsung-Li Lin1,3,4, Hsien-Te Chen1,3,5, Chun-Hao Tsai1,3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Management of acetabular fractures is challenging, especially when a medial acetabular fracture is complicated by central hip dislocation. We retrospectively investigated the clinical outcome and risk factors of secondary hip osteoarthritis requiring total hip arthroplasty after the surgical treatment of acetabular fractures with central hip dislocation.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34568493 PMCID: PMC8463190 DOI: 10.1155/2021/6659640
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1(a) Radiograph of a 47-year-old woman with acetabular fractures and central hip dislocation (AO/OTA 62B3.2). (b) Three-dimensional CT reconstruction. (c) Postoperative radiograph of using dual approaches. (d) Radiograph at final follow-up 405 days after surgery.
Distribution of age, sex, and clinical report in study subjects.
| Patient characteristics | Total number | Survival to THA | Conversion to THA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | 0.046∗ | |||
| Female | 23 (46.0%) | 21 (53.9%) | 2 (18.2%) | |
| Male | 27 (54.0%) | 18 (46.2%) | 9 (81.8%) | |
| BMI | 0.91 | |||
| <24 | 28 (56.0%) | 22 (56.4%) | 6 (54.5%) | |
| ≥24 | 22 (44.0%) | 17 (43.6%) | 5 (45.5%) | |
| AO/OTA classification | 0.31 | |||
| 62B | 30 (60.0%) | 25 (64.1%) | 5 (45.5%) | |
| 62C | 20 (40.0%) | 14 (35.9%) | 6 (54.5%) | |
| Infra/juxta/transtectal | 0.57 | |||
| 1 | 2 (4.0%) | 1 (2.56%) | 1 (9.09%) | |
| 2 | 17 (34.0%) | 14 (35.9%) | 3 (27.3%) | |
| 3 | 31 (62.0%) | 24 (61.5%) | 7 (63.6%) | |
| Marginal impaction | 0.02∗ | |||
| No | 26 (52.0%) | 24 (61.5%) | 2 (18.2%) | |
| Yes | 24 (48.0%) | 15 (38.5%) | 9 (81.8%) | |
| Bladder injury | 0.17 | |||
| No | 43 (86.0%) | 34 (89.7%) | 8 (72.7%) | |
| Yes | 7 (14.0%) | 5 (10.3%) | 3 (27.3%) | |
| Sciatic nerve injury | 0.03∗ | |||
| No | 46 (92.0%) | 38 (97.4%) | 8 (72.7%) | |
| Yes | 4 (8.0%) | 1 (2.56%) | 3 (27.3%) | |
| Central dislocation type | 0.15 | |||
| 1 | 15 (30.0%) | 14 (35.9%) | 1 (9.09%) | |
| 2 | 22 (44.0%) | 17 (43.6%) | 5 (45.5%) | |
| 3 | 13 (26.0%) | 8 (20.5%) | 5 (45.5%) | |
| Matta reduction criteria | 0.055 | |||
| Anatomical | 22 (44.0%) | 19 (48.7%) | 3 (27.3%) | |
| Imperfect | 21 (42.0%) | 17 (43.6%) | 4 (36.4%) | |
| Poor | 7 (14.0%) | 3 (7.69%) | 4 (36.4%) | |
| Age, y, mean (Q1, Q3) | 54.5 (37, 66) | 52.5 (37, 66) | 55 (32, 72) | 0.902 |
| ISS, mean (Q1, Q3) | 16 (10, 20) | 16 (10, 20) | 18 (16, 20) | 0.522 |
1Chi-square test/Fisher's exact test; 2Wilcoxon rank-sum test.
Advanced stage posttraumatic arthritis-associated risk factor using Cox proportional hazard regression.
| Crude HR (95% CI) | Adjusted HR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Age | ||
| <65 | Ref. | |
| 65+ | 1.49 (0.44-5.09) | |
| Sex | ||
| Female | Ref. | Ref. |
| Male | 5.26 (5.26-1.13)∗ | 6.00 (1.20-30.0)∗ |
| BMI | ||
| <24 | Ref. | |
| ≥24 | 0.97 (0.30-3.19) | |
| ISS | ||
| <17 | Ref. | |
| 17+ | 1.64 (0.48-5.62) | |
| AO/OTA classification | ||
| 62B | Ref. | |
| 62C | 1.94 (0.59-6.38) | |
| Infra/juxta/transtectal | ||
| 1 | 3.15 (0.32-30.7) | |
| 2 | Ref. | |
| 3 | 1.50 (0.39-5.80) | |
| Marginal impaction | ||
| No | Ref. | Ref. |
| Yes | 5.80 (1.23-27.3)∗ | 3.91 (0.77-19.8) |
| Bladder injury | ||
| No | Ref. | |
| Yes | 2.67 (0.70-10.1) | |
| Sciatic nerve injury | ||
| No | Ref. | Ref. |
| Yes | 4.39 (1.15-16.8)∗ | 3.68 (0.84-16.1) |
| Central dislocation type | ||
| 1 | Ref. | |
| 2 | 2.68 (0.31-22.9) | |
| 3 | 4.74 (0.55-41.0) | |
| Matta reduction criteria | ||
| Anatomical | Ref. | |
| Imperfect | 1.18 (0.26-5.31) | |
| Poor | 3.68 (0.82-16.5) |
∗P < 0.05, ∗∗P < 0.01.
Figure 2Advanced posttraumatic-arthritis-free probability in Kaplan-Meier analysis. The solid line is the probability, and the long-dotted line is the 95% confidence interval.