| Autor: |
White-Gibson, Ailbhe, Sheridan, Gerard Anthony, Ghetti, Adrian Cassar, Keogh, Peter, Kenny, Paddy, Cashman, James Patrick |
| Zdroj: |
Irish Journal of Medical Science; Feb2024, Vol. 193 Issue 1, p251-255, 5p |
| Abstrakt: |
Background: Total hip replacement (THR) is one of the most common surgical procedures performed worldwide. The controversy surrounding the relative merits of a cemented composite beam or cemented taper-slip stem in total hip replacement continues. Our aims primarily were to assess the 10-year outcomes of cemented stems using Charnley and Exeter prostheses with regional registry data and secondarily to assess the main predictors of revision. Methods: We prospectively collected registry data for procedures performed between January 2005 and June 2008. Only cemented Charnley and Exeter stems were included. Patients were prospectively reviewed at 6 months, 2, 5 and 10 years. The primary outcome measure was a 10-year all-cause revision. Secondary outcomes included 're-revision', 'mortality' and functional 'Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index' (WOMAC) scores. Results: We recorded a total of 1351 cases in the cohort, 395 Exeter and 956 Charnley stems. The overall all-cause revision rate at 10 years was 1.6%. The revision rate for Charnley stem was 1.4% and 2.3% revision rate for all Exeter stems with no significant difference noted between the two cohorts (p = 0.24). The overall time to revision was 38.3 months. WOMAC scores at 10 years were found to be insignificantly higher for Charnley stems (mean 23.8, σ = 20.11) compared to Exeter stems (mean 19.78, σ = 20.72) (p = 0.1). Conclusion: There is no significant difference between cemented Charnley and Exeter stems; they both perform well above the international average. The decline in the use of cemented THA is not fully supported by this regional registry data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink