Monoblock hemiarthroplasties for femoral neck fractures - A part of orthopaedic history? Analysis of national registration of hemiarthroplasties 2005-2009.
(2012) In Injury 43(6). p.946-949- Abstract
- This study from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register (SHAR) compares cemented (Thompson(®), Exeter Trauma Stem (ETS)(®)) and uncemented (Austin-Moore(®)) monoblock hemiarthroplasties (n=1116 and 616, respectively) with modular ones (n=18,659). Austin-Moore(®) prostheses lead to more re-operations (6.7%) compared to modular implants (3.5%) and Thompson(®)/ETS(®) (2.4%). A Cox regression analysis, adjusting for other risk factors, shows twice the risk of re-operation for Austin-Moore(®) implants (CI 1.5-2.8), in particular, due to periprosthetic fracture (5.4; CI 3.2-9.1) and dislocation (1.9; CI 1.3-3.0). The Thompson(®)/ETS(®) implants do not influence the overall risk of re-operation (0.7; CI 0.5-1.2) compared to modular implants and... (More)
- This study from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register (SHAR) compares cemented (Thompson(®), Exeter Trauma Stem (ETS)(®)) and uncemented (Austin-Moore(®)) monoblock hemiarthroplasties (n=1116 and 616, respectively) with modular ones (n=18,659). Austin-Moore(®) prostheses lead to more re-operations (6.7%) compared to modular implants (3.5%) and Thompson(®)/ETS(®) (2.4%). A Cox regression analysis, adjusting for other risk factors, shows twice the risk of re-operation for Austin-Moore(®) implants (CI 1.5-2.8), in particular, due to periprosthetic fracture (5.4; CI 3.2-9.1) and dislocation (1.9; CI 1.3-3.0). The Thompson(®)/ETS(®) implants do not influence the overall risk of re-operation (0.7; CI 0.5-1.2) compared to modular implants and decrease the risk of re-operation due to infection (0.2;CI 0.04-0.7). An increased risk of re-operation is also seen in men, age groups 75-85 years and <75 years and after secondary fracture surgery. Both Swedish and Australian orthopaedic surgeons have decreased their use of Austin-Moore(®) implants after reports from their national arthroplasty registers identifying inferior outcome for this implant. Due to the increased risk of re-operations, it should not be used in modern orthopaedic care. Cemented Thompson(®) or ETS(®) implants could still be suitable for the oldest, low-activity patients. To finally decide if there is a place for them, patient-reported outcome must be analysed as well. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/2336798
- author
- Rogmark, Cecilia LU ; Leonardsson, Olof LU ; Garellick, Göran and Kärrholm, Johan
- organization
- publishing date
- 2012
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Injury
- volume
- 43
- issue
- 6
- pages
- 946 - 949
- publisher
- Elsevier
- external identifiers
-
- wos:000304045100048
- pmid:22209383
- scopus:84860751899
- pmid:22209383
- ISSN
- 1879-0267
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.injury.2011.11.022
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 976c0fb3-2f56-4b65-929f-3a95916f5cf2 (old id 2336798)
- alternative location
- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22209383?dopt=Abstract
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-04 09:15:17
- date last changed
- 2024-05-25 08:33:04
@article{976c0fb3-2f56-4b65-929f-3a95916f5cf2, abstract = {{This study from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register (SHAR) compares cemented (Thompson(®), Exeter Trauma Stem (ETS)(®)) and uncemented (Austin-Moore(®)) monoblock hemiarthroplasties (n=1116 and 616, respectively) with modular ones (n=18,659). Austin-Moore(®) prostheses lead to more re-operations (6.7%) compared to modular implants (3.5%) and Thompson(®)/ETS(®) (2.4%). A Cox regression analysis, adjusting for other risk factors, shows twice the risk of re-operation for Austin-Moore(®) implants (CI 1.5-2.8), in particular, due to periprosthetic fracture (5.4; CI 3.2-9.1) and dislocation (1.9; CI 1.3-3.0). The Thompson(®)/ETS(®) implants do not influence the overall risk of re-operation (0.7; CI 0.5-1.2) compared to modular implants and decrease the risk of re-operation due to infection (0.2;CI 0.04-0.7). An increased risk of re-operation is also seen in men, age groups 75-85 years and <75 years and after secondary fracture surgery. Both Swedish and Australian orthopaedic surgeons have decreased their use of Austin-Moore(®) implants after reports from their national arthroplasty registers identifying inferior outcome for this implant. Due to the increased risk of re-operations, it should not be used in modern orthopaedic care. Cemented Thompson(®) or ETS(®) implants could still be suitable for the oldest, low-activity patients. To finally decide if there is a place for them, patient-reported outcome must be analysed as well.}}, author = {{Rogmark, Cecilia and Leonardsson, Olof and Garellick, Göran and Kärrholm, Johan}}, issn = {{1879-0267}}, language = {{eng}}, number = {{6}}, pages = {{946--949}}, publisher = {{Elsevier}}, series = {{Injury}}, title = {{Monoblock hemiarthroplasties for femoral neck fractures - A part of orthopaedic history? Analysis of national registration of hemiarthroplasties 2005-2009.}}, url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2011.11.022}}, doi = {{10.1016/j.injury.2011.11.022}}, volume = {{43}}, year = {{2012}}, }