Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical effects of combined anteversion and offset on postoperative dislocation in total hip arthroplasty.
Hidaka, Ryo; Matsuda, Kenta; Nakamura, Shigeru; Nakamura, Masaki; Kawano, Hirotaka.
Afiliación
  • Hidaka R; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Teikyo University School of Medicine, 2-11-1, Kaga, Itabashi-Ku, Tokyo, 173-8606, Japan.
  • Matsuda K; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Teikyo University School of Medicine, 2-11-1, Kaga, Itabashi-Ku, Tokyo, 173-8606, Japan. k.osteolysis@gmail.com.
  • Nakamura S; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Nishitokyo Chuo General Hospital, 2-4-19, Shibakubo-Cho, Nishitokyo, Tokyo, 188-0014, Japan.
  • Nakamura M; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Toranomon Hospital, 2-2-2, Toranomon, Minato-Ku, Tokyo, 105-8470, Japan.
  • Kawano H; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Teikyo University School of Medicine, 2-11-1, Kaga, Itabashi-Ku, Tokyo, 173-8606, Japan.
Arthroplasty ; 6(1): 22, 2024 May 05.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38704579
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Implant impingement and soft tissue tension are factors involved in dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Combined anteversion (CA) has been used as an indicator for implant placement. However, optimal implant placement remains a challenge. Moreover, the effect of changes in offset on dislocation is still unclear. In this study, we aimed to clarify the effects of postoperative CA and pre- and postoperative changes in offset on dislocation.

METHODS:

Included were patients who underwent primary cementless THA between 2013 and 2020. The mean values of CA and offset in the dislocation and non-dislocation groups were compared. The CA values within ± 10% of the recommended values were defined as good CA, and those outside the range were rated as poor CA. The dislocation rates were compared between the good and poor CA groups and between the groups with and without increased offset.

RESULTS:

A total of 283 hips were included. The mean values of CA in the dislocation and non-dislocation groups were significantly different (P < 0.05). The dislocation rate was significantly lower in the good CA group (P < 0.05). The dislocation rates in the groups with and without increased total offset were 0.5% and 4.3%, respectively (P = 0.004). There were no dislocations in patients with good CA and increased offset.

CONCLUSIONS:

The dislocation rate was significantly lower when implants were placed within ± 10% of the recommended CA value. Our results suggest that dislocation can be avoided by placing the implant in the good CA range and considering the increase in total offset on the operative side.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Arthroplasty Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Japón Pais de publicación: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Arthroplasty Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Japón Pais de publicación: Reino Unido