Literature DB >> 35959502

Comparison of Exeter stem offset size for total hip arthroplasty between males and females: A retrospective series of 780 hips.

George Jm Hourston1, Jaison Patel1, Stephen M McDonnell1.   

Abstract

Background: Many orthopaedic surgeons use a 'standard' stem offset length, typically 37.5 mm and 44 mm for females and males respectively, in total hip arthroplasty. With increasingly personalized surgery, 'standard' one-size-fits-all stem lengths may be outdated. This study aims to test whether pre-operative templating affects stem length choice and whether 'standard' stem sizes are therefore outdated.
Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of all total hip arthroplasty patients using Stryker's Exeter cemented femoral hip system in our centre between 2016 and 2020. Demographic and surgical data were collected. Data from surgeons who templated pre-operatively were compared to data from those who did not.
Results: 780 patients were included (309 male, 471 female), average age 71.4 years (range 23-96). We found a significant difference between male and female offset lengths; more males had an offset length of 44 mm and more females had an offset length of 37.5 mm (p = 0.004). Among surgeons who did not template pre-operatively, 20.6% of female patients and 10.3% of male patients had other 'non-standard' offset lengths. Among surgeons who did template pre-operatively, the proportion of both female and male patients who had other 'non-standard' offset lengths was significantly higher (43.1% and 23.4%, respectively p < 0.05). Conclusions: The difference between templating and non-templating surgeons' stem choice revealed significant individual variability between males and females. 'Standard' offset lengths for males and females were still used in the majority of our cohort. However, with the emergence of mainstream robotic arthroplasty, we feel that pre-operative templating has become a minimum standard.
© 2022 Delhi Orthopedic Association. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Arthroplasty; Gender; Templating

Year:  2022        PMID: 35959502      PMCID: PMC9358050          DOI: 10.1016/j.jcot.2022.101966

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma        ISSN: 0976-5662


  15 in total

1.  Guidelines for implant placement to minimize impingement during activities of daily living after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Anisha B Patel; Rohan R Wagle; Molly M Usrey; Matt T Thompson; Stephen J Incavo; Philip C Noble
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2009-12-21       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  Functional leg-length inequality following total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  C S Ranawat; J A Rodriguez
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  The influence of femoral offset on health-related quality of life after total hip replacement.

Authors:  T R Liebs; L Nasser; W Herzberg; W Rüther; J Hassenpflug
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 5.082

4.  Hip offset in total hip arthroplasty: quantitative measurement with navigation.

Authors:  Manish Dastane; Lawrence D Dorr; Rupesh Tarwala; Zhinian Wan
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Utility of Intraoperative Fluoroscopic Positioning of Total Hip Arthroplasty Components Using a Posterior and Direct Anterior Approach.

Authors:  Christopher M Belyea; Jefferson L Lansford; Duke G Yim
Journal:  Mil Med       Date:  2022-01-04       Impact factor: 1.437

6.  Acetabular polyethylene wear and acetabular inclination and femoral offset.

Authors:  Nick J Little; Constant A Busch; John A Gallagher; Cecil H Rorabeck; Robert B Bourne
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-05-02       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 7.  A review of the evolution of robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Padmanabhan Subramanian; Tom W Wainwright; Shayan Bahadori; Robert G Middleton
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 2.135

8.  The effect of varus stem placement on joint offset during total hip arthroplasty: a virtual study.

Authors:  Joshua Xu; Jim Pierrepont; Chameka Madurawe; Andrew Shimmin; Warwick Bruce
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2020-12-03       Impact factor: 1.756

9.  Robotic arm-assisted versus manual total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Nicholas D Clement; Paul Gaston; Allison Bell; Philip Simpson; Gavin Macpherson; David F Hamilton; James T Patton
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 5.853

10.  The association of patient characteristics and surgical variables on symptoms of pain and function over 5 years following primary hip-replacement surgery: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Andy Judge; Nigel K Arden; Rajbir N Batra; Geraint Thomas; David Beard; M Kassim Javaid; Cyrus Cooper; David Murray
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-03-01       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.