Patterns and Differences of Acetabular Dome Wear of Normal and Operated Hip Joints between the Unipolar and Bipolar Prostheses in the Femoral Neck Fracture Surgery
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Purpose: To describe the patterns and differences of wear at acetabular dome wall of the normal and the operated hip joints between the unipolar and bipolar prostheses in the femoral neck fracture surgery.
Patients and Methods: The medical records and radiographic imagings of femoral neck fracture patients who were treated with the unipolar or bipolar prostheses at Maharat Nakhon Ratchasima Hospital since July 2010 to September 2015 were reviewed. The acetabular dome wall thickness (ADWT) was measured on true antero-posterior view of both sides of hip joints at the 1st day and every 6 months after surgery. The measurements were designed with various methods for minimizing the deviation and error and detail would be shown in text below. The patterns and differences of wear at acetabular dome wall between operated side and normal side were described. The patient demographic data and the wear at acetabular dome wall were compared between the unipolar and bipolar prostheses groups. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results: All 152 patients were classified into 83 with unipolar and 69 with bipolar prostheses groups. The wear pattern at acetabular dome wall on the normal side was not significantly different in both groups. After sex, ADWT on the operated side at 1 day after surgery and age groups adjusted, the wear differences between two groups were statistically significant at 6, 12, 24, and 30 months after surgery with mean differences of 0.307, 0.609, 0.825, and 2.460, respectively.
Conclusion: The wear patterns at acetabular dome wall in femoral neck fracture surgery were different between the unipolar and bipolar prostheses. They were statistically significant only at 6, 12, 24, 30 months after surgery.
Article Details
References
2. Liu Y, Tao X, Wang P, Zhang Z, Zhang W, Qi Q. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing unipolar with bipolar hemiarthroplasty for femoral-neck fractures. International Orthopaedics 2014; 38: 1691-6.
3. Frihagen F, Nordsletten L, Madsen JE. Hemiarthroplasty or internal fixation for intracapsular displaced femoral neck fractures: randomized controlled trial. BMJ 2007; 335: 1251-4.
4. Gjertsen JE, Vinje T, Engesaeter LB, Lie SA, Havelin LI, Furnes O, et al. Internal screw fixation compared with bipolar hemiarthroplasty for treatment of displaced femoral neck fracture in elderly patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92: 619-28.
5. Iorio R, Schwartz B, Macaulay W, Teeney SM, Healy WL, York S. Surgical treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures in the elderly: a survey of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons. J Arthroplasty 2006; 21: 1124-33.
6. Keating JF, Grant A, Masson M, Scott NW, Forbes JF. Randomized comparison of reduction and fixation, bipolar hemiarthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty. Treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in healthy older patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88: 249-60.
7. Hedbeck CJ, Blomfeldt R, Lapidus G, Törnkvist H, Ponzer S, Tidermark J. Unipolar hemiarthroplasty versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty in the most elderly patients with displaced femoral neck fractures: a randomized, controlled trail. Int Orthop 2011; 35: 1703-11.
8. Dalldorf PG, BanasMp, Hicks DG, Pellegrini VD Jr. Rate of degeneration of human acetabular cartilage after hemiarthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995: 77: 877-82.
9. Kento K, Sihvonen R, Eskelinen A, Laitinen MK. Uni- and bipolar hemiarthroplasty with a modern cemented femoral component provides elderly patients with displaced femoral neck fractures with equal functional outcome and survivorship at medium-term follow-up. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2014; 134: 1251-9.
10. Khan SK, Jameson SS, Sims A, A’Court J, Reed MR, Rangan A, et al. Cemented Thompson’s hemiarthroplasty in patients with intracapsular ne ck of femur fractures: survival analysis of 1,670 procedures. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2015; 25: 655-60.
11. Davison JN, Calder SJ, Anderson GH, Ward G, Jagger C, Harper WM, el al. Treatment for displaced intracapsular fracture of the proximal femur. A prospective, randomized trial in patients aged 65 to 79 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011; 83: 206-12.
12. Inngul C, Hedbeck C-J, Blomfeldt R, Lapidus G, Ponzer S, Enocson A. Unipolar hemiarthroplasty versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty in patients with displaced femoral-neck fractures. A four-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Int Orthop 2013; 37: 2457-64.
13. Kannan A, Kancherla R, McMahon S, Hawdon G, Soral A, Malhotra R. Arthroplasty options in femoral-neck fracture: answers from the national registries. Int Orthop 2012; 36: 1-8.
14. Diwanji SR, Kim SK, Seon JK, Park SJ, Yoon TR. Clinical results of conversion total hip arthroplasty after failed bipolar hemiarthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2008; 23: 1009-15.
15. Dudani B, Shyam AK, Arora P, Arjun Veigus A. Bipolar hip arthroplasty for avascular necrosis of femoral head in young adults. Indian J Orthop 2015; 49: 329-35.
16. Jia Z, Ding F, Wu Y, Li W, Li H, Wang D, et al. Unipolar versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Orthop Surg Res 2015; 10: 8. doi: 10.1186/s13018-015-0165-0.
17. Somashekar, Krishna SV, Sridhara Murthy J. Treatment of femoral neck fractures: unipolar versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Malays Orthop J 2013; 7: 6-11.