Abstract

National arthroplasty registries reveal a higher risk of revision for periprosthetic fracture and dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with a femoral neck fracture compared to those with osteoarthritis (OA). Since these registries may con- tain confounding factors, we conducted a single center cohort study comparing survival and reason for failure between THA for an acute femoral neck fracture and OA using the same hip prosthesis after a minimum follow-up of 2 years. We retrospectively analyzed 2782 patients who had undergone THA with an Accolade TMZF stem and a Trident cup between March 2009 and September 2014. Primary diagnosis before THA was osteoarthritis (OA group : n=2610) or acute femoral fracture (Fracture group : n=172). Patients in both groups were operated on by the same hip surgeons. Effect of diagnosis on THA survival was analyzed using Cox-regression analysis. Chi-square tests were used to illustrate the different reasons for revision between the groups. Mean follow-up was 4.6 years (2-7.6). A total of 100 revisions were performed. The revision risk was comparable between the OA and Fracture group (HR=1.04, 95% CI :0.46-2.39). No differences were found between the OA and Fracture group with respect to the occurrence of periprosthetic fractures (0.8% vs. 0.6%, p=0.71) and revisions for dislocation (0.6% vs. 1.2%, p=0.38). We found no difference in outcome or reason for revision between THA for OA or femoral neck frac- ture. Using an implant with a proven ODEP rating and having experienced hip surgeons carry out the procedures may be more important than the primary diagnosis.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call