Hip Resurfacing vs Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients Younger than 35 Years: A Comparison of Revision Rates and Patient-Reported Outcomes.
HOOS-JR
Hip resurfacing
Total hip arthroplasty
UCLA activity score
mHHS
Journal
Arthroplasty today
ISSN: 2352-3441
Titre abrégé: Arthroplast Today
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101681808
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2021
Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
10
04
2021
revised:
24
08
2021
accepted:
07
09
2021
entrez:
25
10
2021
pubmed:
26
10
2021
medline:
26
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) are two treatment options for end-stage degenerative hip conditions. The objective of this single-center retrospective cohort study was to compare implant survival and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in young patients (≤35 years) who underwent HRA or THA. All patients aged 35 years or younger who underwent HRA or THA with a single high-volume arthroplasty surgeon between 2004 and 2015 were reviewed. The sample included 33 THAs (26 patients) and 76 HRAs (65 patients). Five-year implant survival and minimum 2-year PROs were compared between patient cohorts. Three patients in the THA group (9%) were revised within 5 years for instability (n = 1), squeaking (n = 1), or squeaking with a ceramic liner fracture (n = 1). No patients who underwent HRA were revised. The University of California, Los Angeles, activity score, modified Harris Hip score, and Hip Dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores for Joint Replacement increased by 74%, 64%, and 49%, respectively, among all patients. Compared to the HRA cohort, patients who underwent THA had lower preoperative and postoperative University of California, Los Angeles, activity, modified Harris Hip score, and Hip Dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores for Joint Replacement scores, yet there were no differences in the absolute improvements in any of the three measures between the two groups. Excellent functional outcomes were seen in young patients undergoing either HRA or THA. Although young patients undergoing THA started at lower preoperative baseline and postoperative PROs than patients undergoing HRA, both groups improved by an equal amount after surgery, suggesting that both HRA and THA afford a similar degree of potential improvement in a young population.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) are two treatment options for end-stage degenerative hip conditions. The objective of this single-center retrospective cohort study was to compare implant survival and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in young patients (≤35 years) who underwent HRA or THA.
METHODS
METHODS
All patients aged 35 years or younger who underwent HRA or THA with a single high-volume arthroplasty surgeon between 2004 and 2015 were reviewed. The sample included 33 THAs (26 patients) and 76 HRAs (65 patients). Five-year implant survival and minimum 2-year PROs were compared between patient cohorts.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Three patients in the THA group (9%) were revised within 5 years for instability (n = 1), squeaking (n = 1), or squeaking with a ceramic liner fracture (n = 1). No patients who underwent HRA were revised. The University of California, Los Angeles, activity score, modified Harris Hip score, and Hip Dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores for Joint Replacement increased by 74%, 64%, and 49%, respectively, among all patients. Compared to the HRA cohort, patients who underwent THA had lower preoperative and postoperative University of California, Los Angeles, activity, modified Harris Hip score, and Hip Dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores for Joint Replacement scores, yet there were no differences in the absolute improvements in any of the three measures between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Excellent functional outcomes were seen in young patients undergoing either HRA or THA. Although young patients undergoing THA started at lower preoperative baseline and postoperative PROs than patients undergoing HRA, both groups improved by an equal amount after surgery, suggesting that both HRA and THA afford a similar degree of potential improvement in a young population.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34692960
doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2021.09.004
pii: S2352-3441(21)00168-0
pmc: PMC8516816
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
229-233Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Authors.
Références
Acta Orthop. 2006 Feb;77(1):57-70
pubmed: 16534703
Hip Int. 2018 Jan;28(1):11-17
pubmed: 29027192
J Arthroplasty. 2010 Feb;25(2):325-9
pubmed: 19056234
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2012 Aug;20(8):487-97
pubmed: 22855851
Hip Int. 2015 May-Jun;25(3):191-8
pubmed: 25684252
J Arthroplasty. 2018 Dec;33(12):3704-3711
pubmed: 30217401
Bone Joint J. 2016 Jul;98-B(7):910-6
pubmed: 27365468
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013 May 08;14:161
pubmed: 23656900
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Dec;91(12):1566-74
pubmed: 19949118
J Orthop Surg Res. 2017 Jun 2;12(1):79
pubmed: 28578684
Can J Surg. 2003 Aug;46(4):257-62
pubmed: 12930101
Hip Int. 2020 Sep 9;:1120700020957354
pubmed: 32905713
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Feb;470(2):382-7
pubmed: 22045071
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Feb;470(2):402-9
pubmed: 22125246
J Orthop Translat. 2020 Jan 06;21:41-48
pubmed: 32071874
Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2009;67(2):108-12
pubmed: 19583535
BMJ Open. 2018 Mar 12;8(3):e018849
pubmed: 29530907
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016 Jun;474(6):1472-82
pubmed: 26926772
Ann Transl Med. 2019 Feb;7(4):77
pubmed: 30963072
Acta Orthop. 2011 Feb;82(1):1-5
pubmed: 21189098
J Arthroplasty. 1998 Dec;13(8):890-5
pubmed: 9880181
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 May;88(5):592-600
pubmed: 16645103
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Feb;468(2):382-91
pubmed: 19779950
Orthopedics. 2015 Apr;38(4):e331-8
pubmed: 25901628
Arthroscopy. 2000 Sep;16(6):578-87
pubmed: 10976117
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Jan;467(1):56-65
pubmed: 18941859
Int Orthop. 2012 Sep;36(9):1789-94
pubmed: 22576079
Arthroplast Today. 2020 Dec 24;7:22-28
pubmed: 33521193
BMJ. 2012 Apr 19;344:e2147
pubmed: 22517930
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2020 Jul;140(7):957-962
pubmed: 32296965
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008 Mar;90(3):637-54
pubmed: 18310716
JB JS Open Access. 2020 May 11;5(2):
pubmed: 32832826
Hip Int. 2021 Sep;31(5):637-643
pubmed: 32390475
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 Jun;88(6):721-6
pubmed: 16720762
Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2014 Sep;2(3):157-62
pubmed: 25386575
J Arthroplasty. 2013 Jan;28(1):147-53
pubmed: 22819379
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018 Nov 7;100(21):1879-1887
pubmed: 30399083
Bone Joint J. 2018 Jul;100-B(7):867-874
pubmed: 29954212
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Aug;91(8):1025-30
pubmed: 19651828
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016 Oct;474(10):2190-9
pubmed: 27255729
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Jan;467(1):72-8
pubmed: 18949528
Bone Joint J. 2019 Jan;101-B(1_Supple_A):32-40
pubmed: 30648490
J Arthroplasty. 2018 Mar;33(3):661-667
pubmed: 29153865