| Literature DB >> 34824533 |
Bohan Zhang1,2, Jingyang Sun1,2, Yinqiao Du2,3, Junmin Shen2,4, Tiejian Li1,2, Yonggang Zhou1,2,3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to demonstrate the methods of treatment for coxa vara with modular total hip arthroplasty (THA) and evaluate clinical and radiographic outcomes, and further survivorship at the midterm follow-up.Entities:
Keywords: coxa vara; modular; osteoarthritis; total hip arthroplasty
Year: 2021 PMID: 34824533 PMCID: PMC8610750 DOI: 10.2147/TCRM.S335015
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ther Clin Risk Manag ISSN: 1176-6336 Impact factor: 2.423
Patient Characteristics
| Total | B-O Type III | B-O Type IV | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of hips (patients) | 42(33) | 21(16) | 21(17) | |
| Age (years)* | 42.3±13.1 | 45.2±14.6 | 39.4±10.8 | 0.253 |
| Height (cm)* | 160.5±8.9 | 161.8±9.1 | 158.2±9.2 | 0.298 |
| BMI (kg/m2)* | 22.26±3.37 | 24.5±5.4 | 22.4±3.3 | 0.196 |
| Gender | ||||
| Male | 11 (33%) | 7(44%) | 4 (24%) | |
| Female | 22 (67%) | 9 (56%) | 13 (76%) | |
| Follow-up (months)* | 69.9±43.7 | 63.7±42.6 | 76.2±45.0 | 0.360 |
Note: *The values are given as the mean and standard deviation.
Abbreviation: BMI, body mass index.
Figure 1Diagrams for radiographic measurement of coxa vara (A) pre-operation; (B) the final follow-up.
Long-Term Clinical Evaluation
| Pre-Operation | Final Follow-Up | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| HHS (points) | 42.9±14.4 | 89.5±4.8 | <0.001 |
| LLD (mm) | 33.3±19.4 | 5.0±5.8 | <0.001 |
Note: The values are given as the mean and standard deviation.
Abbreviations: HHS, Harris hip score; LLD, limb length discrepancy.
Radiographic Assessment
| Pre-Operation | Final Follow-Up | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| GTH (mm) | 37.2±12.0 | 3.4±8.3 | <0.001 |
| FO (mm) | 23.1±7.8 | 31.5±5.9 | <0.001 |
| Body weight lever arm (mm) | 102.9±10.6 | 84.8±9.0 | <0.001 |
| ALA (mm) | 48.8±9.7 | 53.1±9.8 | 0.014 |
Note: The values are given as the mean and standard deviation.
Abbreviations: GTH, great trochanteric height; FO, femoral offset; ALA, abductor lever arm.
Figure 2Scattergram showed there were significant differences in radiographic parameters (GTH, FO, ALA and Body weight lever arm) between the pre-operation and the final follow-up.
Figure 3A 39-year-old woman with severe coxa vara. Preoperative (A) anteroposterior X-ray showed the severe deformity of the hip. Postoperative (B) anteroposterior X-ray showed normal anatomical structure and biomechanics were restored and the modular prosthesis achieved the initial stability.37 (C) After 11.2 years it showed the optimal positions of the acetabular cup and femoral stem and the patient had no related symptoms.
Figure 4The Kaplan–Meier survival curve with revision for any reason as the end point was shown.
Figure 5Preoperative (A) the deformity of coxa vara is associated with a high dislocation and a narrow and straight medullary cavity, which might be undergone the subtrochanteric osteotomy. Postoperative (B) the use of conical sleeve in SROM prosthesis made the stem sink deeper to avoid the osteotomy probably.