Abstract

BackgroundThe variation of femoral anteversion is not completely consistent with the grade of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), which poses challenges to hip replacement with the non-modular tapered stem. Currently, whether the modular stem should be used in Crowe I and II DDH is still controversial. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy of the modular stem and the non-modular tapered stem in Crowe I and II DDH patients.MethodsWe retrospective analyzed the clinical data of 196 patients with unilateral Crowe I and II DDH from January 2015 to January 2017. One hundred patients were operated by an experienced surgeon with the modular stems; the remaining 96 patient was operated by another equivalent surgeon with the non-modular tapered stems. The preoperative basic information, operating time, intraoperative and postoperative complications, postoperative leg length discrepancy (LLD) and offset, Harris hip score (HHS), and forgotten joint score (FJS) in postoperative 2 years were collected and analyzed.ResultsPostoperative LLD (P = 0.010) and FJS (P = 0.001) had significant difference between two groups. Concurrent acceptable LLD and offset were achieved in 87% of patients with the modular stem and in 68% of patients with the non-modular stem (P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in the operating time (P = 0.086), intraoperative complication (P = 0.096), postoperative dislocation rate (P = 0.056), postoperative offset difference (P = 0.108), and Harris score (P = 0.877) between two groups.ConclusionsCompared with the non-modular tapered stem, the modular stem was more likely to provide accurate reconstruction and forgotten artificial hip for Crowe I and II DDH patients. We recommend the modular stem as routine choice for these patients.

Highlights

  • The variation of femoral anteversion is not completely consistent with the grade of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), which poses challenges to hip replacement with the non-modular tapered stem

  • Leg length discrepancy (LLD), altered hip biomechanics, dysfunctional gait, lower back pain, instability, and dislocation followed by Total hip arthroplasty (THA) are recognized as imperfections or complications [3, 4]

  • LLD and offset Regarding preoperative measurement and clinical function, there were no significant differences in LLD and offset-D between the two groups

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The variation of femoral anteversion is not completely consistent with the grade of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), which poses challenges to hip replacement with the non-modular tapered stem. Whether the modular stem should be used in Crowe I and II DDH is still controversial. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy of the modular stem and the non-modular tapered stem in Crowe I and II DDH patients. Leg length discrepancy (LLD), altered hip biomechanics, dysfunctional gait, lower back pain, instability, and dislocation followed by THA are recognized as imperfections or complications [3, 4]. The femoral stem with two modular junctions was proved to have more frequent ability to restore femoral offset and leg length than the single modular junction [7]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
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