ARTHROPLASTY
Palacos compared to Palamed bone cement in total hip replacement: a randomized controlled trial
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2017;5(3):1 Acta Orthop. 2016 Oct;87(5):473-839 patients scheduled for cemented total hip arthroplasty were randomized to receive either low viscosity bone cement or high viscosity bone cement. The purpose of this study was to compare femoral component migration via radiostereometric analysis (RSA) over a 10-year follow-up. The results of this study demonstrated no significant differences between groups in femoral component translation or rotation over the follow-up.
Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?
Was allocation adequately concealed?
Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?
Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?
Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?
Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?
Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?
はい = 1
不確実＝0.5
無関係 = 0
いいえ = 0
報告基準評価では、著者が出版物内で試験の方法論的特徴や試験特性を報告する際の透明性を評価します。評価は以下の5つのカテゴリーに分類されます。
2/4
Randomization
3/4
Outcome Measurements
4/4
Inclusion / Exclusion
2/4
Therapy Description
3/4
Statistics
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
Fragility Indexは、重要な所見の解釈を助けるツールで、結果の強さの尺度を提供します。Fragility Indexは、その所見が有意でなくなるために、二項対立の結果に追加する必要がある連続した事象の数を表します。数値が小さいほど弱い所見を表し、数値が大きいほど強い所見を表します。
なぜ今この研究が必要なのですか？
Aseptic loosening of components in cemented total hip arthroplasty is the most common reason for revision and has been suggested to be predicted by early, short-term migration. High and medium viscosity bone cement have traditionally been used, with low viscosity bone cement more recently introduced. It is unknown if early migration, and ultimately revision rates, significantly differ between high and low viscosity bone cement.
主な研究課題は何ですか？
In cemented total hip arthroplasty, is there any significant difference in radiostereometric analysis of component migration between components fixed with low viscosity bone cement (Palamed) versus high viscosity bone cement (Palacos) over a 10-year follow-up?
重要な知見は？
- Only 12 patients were available for the 10-year follow-up.
- No significant difference between groups in mediolateral, craniocaudal, or anteroposterior translation of the femoral component was observed over 10-year follow-up (p=0.5, 0.4, and 0.9, respectively).
- Maximum total point motion also did not significantly differ between the Palamed group (1.3mm [95%CI 0.88-1.8]) and the Palacos group (1.3mm [95%CI 0.56-2.1]) after 10 years (p=0.7).
- No significant difference between groups in mediolateral, craniocaudal, or anteroposterior rotation of the femoral component was observed over 10-year follow-up (p=0.6, 0.9, and 0.6, respectively).
- There were no differences in the Harris Hip Score at any time point between the two groups.
最も覚えておくべきことは？
In cemented total hip arthroplasty, there was no significant difference in femoral prosthesis migration after 10 years between components fixed with a low viscosity bone cement (Palamed) and components fixed with a high viscosity bone cement (Palacos).
それが私の患者ケアにどのように影響するか？
The results of this study suggest that low viscosity Palamed bone cement and high viscosity Palacos cement demonstrate similar long-term stability of the femoral component in cemented total hip arthroplasty. The similar results observed with these two types of cement suggest that decisions regarding the cement used should be left to the discretion of the surgeon. However, it should be noted that the limited number of patients still available at the 10-year follow-up limited the ability to detect significant differences.
免責事項
このページに記載されている内容は、情報提供のみを目的としたものであり、専門的な医療アドバイス、診断、治療の代わりとなるものではありません。治療が必要な場合は、必ず医師の診断を仰ぐか、最寄りの救急外来を受診してください。このページに記載されている内容に関して個人が表明した意見、信念、見解は、OrthoEvidenceの意見、信念、見解を反映するものではありません。
0の4 月間無料記事のロック解除
