Similar migration & wear of an all-poly press-fit cup with and without screw stabilization .
This report has been verified
by one or more authors of the
original publication.
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2016;4(22):2 Acta Orthop. 2016 Aug;87(4):363-736 patients who had undergone total hip arthroplasty and completed a 2-year follow-up of a previous randomized controlled trial were invited and included in this follow-up extension. Patients had received a press-fit, all-polyethylene acetabular cup, and had been randomized to placement with or without additional screw fixation. Radiostereometric analysis was performed to assess component migration and wear over 6.5-year follow-up, and the Harris Hip Score and Oxford Hip Score were used to assess clinical outcome. No significant differences were observed between groups in total 3-dimensional translation or rotation of the acetabular component. There were also no significant differences between groups in the total overall and corrected 3-dimensional wear or overall & corrected wear rates.
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)?
Oui = 1
Incertain = 0,5
Non pertinent = 0
Non = 0
L'évaluation des critères de rapport permet d'évaluer la transparence avec laquelle les auteurs rapportent les caractéristiques méthodologiques et les caractéristiques de l'essai dans la publication. L'évaluation est divisée en cinq catégories qui sont présentées ci-dessous.
1/4
Randomization
3/4
Outcome Measurements
0/4
Inclusion / Exclusion
2/4
Therapy Description
4/4
Statistics
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
L'indice de fragilité est un outil qui aide à l'interprétation des résultats significatifs, en fournissant une mesure de la force d'un résultat. L'indice de fragilité représente le nombre d'événements consécutifs qui doivent être ajoutés à un résultat dichotomique pour que le résultat ne soit plus significatif. Un petit nombre représente un résultat plus faible et un grand nombre un résultat plus fort.
Pourquoi cette étude était-elle nécessaire maintenant ?
Press-fit fixation of acetabular cups is often used in total hip arthroplasty. A debate has emerged surrounding the use of additional fixation screws in press-fit acetabular cups. While improved short-term stability may occur, there is concern that long-term stability could be compromised through various mechanisms, such as stress-shielding and wear. However, there is a current lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials to recommend either the use or avoidance of additional screw fixation with press-fit acetabular cups.
Quelle était la principale question de recherche ?
In total hip arthroplasty, is there any significant difference in cup migration, cup wear, and clinical outcome of a cementless all-polyethylene acetabular cup with and without screw fixation, assessed over a 6.5-year follow-up?
- There was no significant difference between the screw group and no screw group in either total 3-dimensional translation (p=0.8) or total 3-dimensional rotation (p=0.2).
- Between-group differences in individual planes were non-significant, with the exception of medial-lateral rotation: mean rotation was 0.33deg (+/-0.50) in the screw group and -0.61deg (+/-0.97) in the no screw group (p=0.004).
- There were two cases of clinically relevant rotation of the acetabular component in each group. The same two cases in the no screw group also demonstrated clinically relevant translation of the acetabular component.
- There was no significant difference in total wear over 6-year follow-up between the screw group (0.57+/-0.24mm) and the no screw group (0.53+/-0.20mm) (p=0.6). The only plane which demonstrated a significant difference between groups was medial-lateral wear (Screws: 0.19+/-0.22mm | No screws: -0.04+/-0.12mm | p=0.003).
- Corrected wear analysis, which accounted for the large degree of wear within the first year after surgery, demonstrated similar results to the overall analysis.
- Overall wear rate over 6 years did not significantly differ between the screw group (0.09+/-0.04 mm/year) and the no screw group (0.08+/-0.03 mm/year) (p=0.7). Corrected wear rate also did not significantly differ between groups (0.07+/-0.04 vs. 0.09+/-0.04 mm/year; p=0.3).
- No significant difference between groups was noted either HHS (p=0.6) or OHS (p=0.6).
De quoi dois-je me souvenir en priorité ?
In total hip arthroplasty with a press-fit acetabular cup, there were no significant differences in total 3-dimensional translation or rotation of the acetabular cup after 6.5 years, as assessed with RSA, with or without additional screw stabilization. There were also no significant differences in RSA-assessed component wear or clinical outcome after 6 years.
Comment cela affectera-t-il les soins prodigués à mes patients ?
The results of this study suggest that additional screw stabilization of cementless, press-fit all-polyethylene acetabular cup in total hip arthroplasty does not confer any significant mid-term advantage in migration, component wear, or clinical outcome over cups placed without additional stabilization.
AVIS DE NON-RESPONSABILITÉ
Le contenu de cette page est fourni à titre d'information uniquement et n'est pas destiné à remplacer un avis médical, un diagnostic ou un traitement professionnel. Si vous avez besoin d'un traitement médical, demandez toujours l'avis de votre médecin ou rendez-vous au service des urgences le plus proche. Les opinions, croyances et points de vue exprimés par les individus sur le contenu de cette page ne reflètent pas les opinions, croyances et points de vue d'OrthoEvidence.
0 de 4 articles mensuels GRATUITS débloqués
