Is there any range-of-motion advantage to using bearings larger than 36 mm in primary hip arthroplasty: A case-control study comparing 36-mm and large-diameter heads - 20/09/16
, S. Putman a, b, G. Dereudre a, b, c, J. Girard a, b, V. Lancelier-Bariatinsky a, b, E. Drumez d, H. Migaud a, b
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
Article gratuit.
Connectez-vous pour en bénéficier!
Abstract |
Background |
Large-diameter (>36mm) total hip arthroplasty (THA) has developed rapidly since the advent of ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearings and highly cross-linked polyethylene. Theoretically, the increase in diameter reduces the risk of instability, although the advantage of calibers beyond 36mm has not been demonstrated in terms of range-of-motion recovery. We conducted a comparative study with a single prosthesis model to determine whether increasing the caliber beyond 36mm provides: (1) better recovery of range-of-motion, (2) a higher functional score, and (3) reduction of the dislocation rate.
Hypothesis |
Increasing the range-of-motion by increasing the caliber beyond 36mm provides better range-of-motion.
Material and methods |
We analyzed two consecutive, single-operator cementless THA series performed via the mini posterior approach, which differed only in the bearing system (51 metal-on-metal [MoM] with a mean caliber of 45mm±3.3 [range, 40–54] and 61 CoC with a 36-mm caliber). Both series were comparable preoperatively in terms of age, diagnosis, functional scores, preoperative range-of-motion, body mass index, UCLA activity level, and Charnley score. We compared the joint range of movement at follow-up and the gains in range of movement, onset of dislocation, and functional scores (Oxford, Postel-Merle d’Aubigné [PMA]).
Results |
The mean overall joint range-of-motion was 254°±39° (range, 150–310°) for an 81°±44° (range, −50 to 180°) gain in the MoM group and 256°±23° (range, 200–280°) for an 84°±40° (range, 0–160°) gain in the CoC group (NS). The MoM group presented the following results: Oxford=13.71±3.66 (range, 12–33) for a gain of 24.82 points±7.9 (range, −1 to 40), PMA=17.75±1.06 (range, 11–18) for a gain of 7.78 points±4.01 (range, 2–15). The CoC group had: Oxford=14.98±4.42 (range, 12–36) for a gain of 24.75 points±6.55 (range, 12–40), PMA 17.66±0.7 (range, 14–18) for a gain of 8 points±3.77 (range, 1–15). None of the gains and scores at follow-up differed significantly between the two groups. No episode of dislocation was identified.
Discussion |
The current trend of increasing femoral head diameters beyond 36mm to improve the gains in joint range-of-motion and function is not warranted. The potential side effects of increasing the caliber call for even greater caution in the use of large-diameter heads because our hypothesis has not been confirmed.
Level of evidence |
Case-control study, level III.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Hip prosthesis, Large-diameter head, Range-of-motion, Daily living activities, Rehabilitation
Plan
Vol 102 - N° 6
P. 735-740 - octobre 2016 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Short-term comparison of postural effects of three minimally invasive hip approaches in primary total hip arthroplasty: Direct anterior, posterolateral and Röttinger
- S. Van Driessche, F. Billuart, L. Martinez, H. Brunel, P. Guiffault, J. Beldame, J. Matsoukis
- Selecting, assessing and interpreting measures of function for patients with severe hip pathology: The need for caution
- E. Lenguerrand, V. Wylde, L. Brunton, R. Gooberman-Hill, A. Blom, P. Dieppe
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.