scholarly journals The economic benefit of hip replacement: a 5-year follow-up of costs and outcomes in the Exeter Primary Outcomes Study

BMJ Open ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. e000752 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Fordham ◽  
Jane Skinner ◽  
Xia Wang ◽  
John Nolan ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 030006052110122
Author(s):  
Wenlu Liu ◽  
Huanyi Lin ◽  
Xianshang Zeng ◽  
Meiji Chen ◽  
Weiwei Tang ◽  
...  

Objective To compare the clinical outcomes of primary metal-on-metal total hip replacement (MoM-TR) converted to uncemented total hip replacement (UTR) or cemented total hip replacement (CTR) in patients with femoral neck fractures (AO/OTA: 31B/C). Methods Patient data of 234 UTR or CTR revisions after primary MoM-TR failure from March 2007 to January 2018 were retrospectively identified. Clinical outcomes, including the Harris hip score (HHS) and key orthopaedic complications, were collected at 3, 6, and 12 months following conversion and every 12 months thereafter. Results The mean follow-up was 84.12 (67–100) months for UTR and 84.23 (66–101) months for CTR. At the last follow-up, the HHS was better in the CTR- than UTR-treated patients. Noteworthy dissimilarities were correspondingly detected in the key orthopaedic complication rates (16.1% for CTR vs. 47.4% for UTR). Statistically significant differences in specific orthopaedic complications were also detected in the re-revision rate (10.3% for UTR vs. 2.5% for CTR), prosthesis loosening rate (16.3% for UTR vs. 5.9% for CTR), and periprosthetic fracture rate (12.0% for UTR vs. 4.2% for CTR). Conclusion In the setting of revision of failed primary MoM-TR, CTR may demonstrate advantages over UTR in improving functional outcomes and reducing key orthopaedic complications.


1989 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 503-506
Author(s):  
Kenichi Aramaki ◽  
Mitsuru Takeshita ◽  
Kohji Kuroda ◽  
Akio Nakamura ◽  
Yuji Fukahori ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 536-542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margareta Bachrach-Lindström ◽  
Susanne Karlsson ◽  
Lars-Göran Pettersson ◽  
Torsten Johansson

2021 ◽  
pp. 71-75
Author(s):  
Arun Kumar C ◽  
Ganashree S ◽  
Arivoli S ◽  
Aswath C A ◽  
Rakesh Kumar B ◽  
...  

Introduction: Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) or Total hip replacement (THR), as it is popularly called, attempts to mollify these basic clinical problems, in patients with a hip arthritic problem, which may be of a sequela to age-related degeneration, osteonecrosis, systemic disorder like Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or Ankylosing spondylosis (AS) or as a result of trauma and or an old infection. The basic pathology, is an unfavourable and abrading hip diarthrodial joint. The endeavour of the study was, to establish the efcacy of the Posterior vs Lateral approach for THA/THR, by studying their outcomes in primary THR. This prospective study was undertaken at Che Materials And Methods: ttinad Hospital and Research Institute (CARE), Kelambakkam, Chengalpattu district, Tamilnadu, In the Department of Orthopaedics from Jan 2017 to Dec 2020 (48 months). The Functional outcome of hip surgery was measured using the Harris Hip Score, Oxford hip score and the WOMAC. Rivermead visual gait analysis (RVGA) method was used post-operatively to assess the gait. The Biomechanical outcomes of Abductor Gait Component, were individually assessed by EMG studies. The Harris Hip Score, The Oxford Hip S Results: core and WOMAC score, when the lateral approach was compared to the posterior approach pre-op and post-op in the 12 months minimum follow-up period, the laterally approached group faired better. The VAS score was equivocal. The comprehensive RVGA assessment also showed marginally better results for the laterally approached group as was the case with the Trendelenburg test score. The EMG studies for the Gluteus Maximus, Medius and the lateral rotators of hip also favoured the outcomes for the laterally approach hips. The supremacy of the Lateral Approach, ove Conclusion: r Posterior Approach, cannot be adjudged in a short-term follow-up study. It is thus opined that the Lateral Approach may be statistically and data wise superior, but the patient satisfaction, which is a major factor, is almost the same in both the approach groups. The follow-up needs to be atleast for a decade for us to be able to come to any meaningful conclusion. With regards to surgery like the Total hip replacement, which have a longevity factor exceeding 10 years, studies have to be followed up for periods in excess of 10 years.


Children ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. 858
Author(s):  
Giovanni Trisolino ◽  
Stefano Stallone ◽  
Francesco Castagnini ◽  
Barbara Bordini ◽  
Monica Cosentino ◽  
...  

Background: total hip replacement (THR) is a rare surgical option in children and adolescents with disabling hip diseases. The aim of this study is to report results from a retrospective cohort of patients aged 18 years or less who underwent cementless Ceramic-on-Ceramic (CoC) THR at a single institution, investigating clinical and radiographic outcomes, survival rates, and reasons for revision of the implants. Materials and methods: we queried the Registry of Prosthetic Orthopedic Implants (RIPO) to identify all children and adolescents undergoing THR between 2000 and 2019 at a single Institution. Inclusion criteria were patients undergoing cementless CoC THR, aged less than 18 years at surgery, followed for at least 2 years. Sixty-eight patients (74 hips) matched all the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study. We assessed the clinical and radiographic outcomes, the rate of complications, the survival rate, and reasons for revision of the implants. Results: The mean follow-up was 6.6 ± 4.4 years (range 2–20). The most frequent reason for THR was post-traumatic or chemotherapy-induced avascular necrosis (38%). The overall survival rate of the cohort was 97.6% (95% CI: 84.9–99.7%) at 5 years of follow-up, 94.4% (95% CI: 79.8–98.6%) at 10 years and 15 years of follow-up. Two THR in two patients (2.7%) required revision. With the numbers available, Cox regression analysis could not detect any significant interaction between preoperative or intraoperative variables and implant survivorship (p-value 0.242 to 0.989).” The average HOOS was 85 ± 14.3 (range 30.6–100). Overall, 23 patients (48%) reported excellent HOOS scores (>90 points), 21 patients (44%) reported acceptable HOOS scores (60–90 points) while 4 patients (8%) reported poor outcomes (<60 points). Twenty-one patients (43%) were regularly involved into moderate- to high-intensity sport activities (UCLA ≥ 6). Conclusions: Cementless CoC THR is a successful procedure in children and teenagers, having demonstrated high implant survivorship and low rates of complications and failure. A meticulous preoperative planning and implant selection is mandatory, to avoid implant malposition, which is the main reason of failure and revision in these cases. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of the THR on the psychosocial wellbeing of teenagers, as well as risks and benefits and cost-effectiveness in comparison to the hip preserving surgical procedures.


1990 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-137
Author(s):  
Sakamichi Ikeda ◽  
Katsuro Iwasaki ◽  
Yutaka Nakajima

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document