THA for a fractured femoral neck: comparing the results of standard, large head, dual mobility, and constrained liners
<p><strong>Background:</strong> THA is a reasonable surgical option for some patients with fragility fractures of the femoral neck, but it has the risk of prosthesis dislocation. The prosthesis combination that reduces the risk of dislocation and the rate of revision surgery is not...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins
2020
|
| _version_ | 1797074813164978176 |
|---|---|
| author | Hoskins, W Griffin, X Hatton, A Steiger, R Bingham, R |
| author_facet | Hoskins, W Griffin, X Hatton, A Steiger, R Bingham, R |
| author_sort | Hoskins, W |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | <p><strong>Background:</strong> THA is a reasonable surgical option for some patients with fragility fractures of the femoral neck, but it has the risk of prosthesis dislocation. The prosthesis combination that reduces the risk of dislocation and the rate of revision surgery is not known.</p>
<p><strong>Questions/purposes:</strong> In patients receiving primary THA for a femoral neck fracture, does (1) the rate of all-cause revision or (2) the reason for revision and rate of revision for dislocation differ among THA with a standard head size, large head size, dual mobility (DM), or constrained liner? (3) Is there a difference in the revision risk when patients are stratified by age at the time of surgery?</p>
<p><strong>Methods:</strong> Data were analyzed for 16,692 THAs performed to treat fractures of the femoral neck reported in the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) from January 2008 to December 2018, as this included the first use of DM prostheses. The AOANJRR includes information on more than 98% of arthroplasty procedures performed in Australia. Most patients were female (72%) and the mean age was 74 years ± 11. There were 8582 standard-head prostheses, 5820 large-head prostheses, 1778 DM prostheses, and 512 constrained prostheses identified. The cumulative percent revision (CPR) was determined for all causes as well as CPR for dislocation. The time to the first revision was described using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship, with right censoring for death or closure of the database at the time of analysis. The unadjusted CPR was estimated each year of the first 10 years for standard heads, 10 years for large heads, 8 years for constrained liners, and 7 years for DM prostheses, with 95% confidence intervals using unadjusted pointwise Greenwood estimates. The results were adjusted for age, sex, femoral fixation, and head size where appropriate and were considered by age groups < 70 and ≥ 70 years.</p>
<p><strong>Results:</strong> When adjusted for age, sex, femoral fixation and head size, there was no difference in the rate of all-cause revision at 7 years for any of the four groups. There was no difference in the rate of all-cause revision when patients were stratified by < 70 or ≥ 70 years of age. Dislocation was the most common reason for revision (32%). When analyzing revision for dislocation alone, large-head THA had a lower rate of revision for dislocation compared with standard head (HR 0.6 [95% CI 0.4 to 0.8]; p < 0.001) and DM prostheses had a lower rate of revision for dislocation than standard head for the first 3 months (HR 0.3 [95% CI 0.1 to 0.7]; p < 0.004) but not after this time point.</p>
<p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> The Australian registry shows that there is no difference in the rate of all-cause revision for standard-head, large-head, DM prostheses or constrained liner THA after femoral neck fractures for all patients or for patients stratified into younger than 70 years and at least 70 years of age groups. Dislocation is the most common cause of revision. Large-head prostheses are associated with a lower revision risk for dislocation and DM prostheses have a lower rate of revision for dislocation than standard heads for the first 3 months only. Surgeons treating a femoral neck fracture with THA might consider a large head size if the diameter of the acetabulum will allow it and a DM prosthesis if a large head size is not possible. The age, life expectancy and level of function of patients with femoral neck fractures minimizes the potential long-term consequences of these prostheses. The lack of significant differences in survival between most prosthesis combinations means surgeons should continue to look for factors beyond head size and prosthesis to minimize dislocation and revision surgery.</p>
<p><strong>Level of Evidence:</strong> Level III, therapeutic study.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-06T23:41:38Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:6f87ee08-6714-4adc-a5ee-69d4d631639d |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-06T23:41:38Z |
| publishDate | 2020 |
| publisher | Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:6f87ee08-6714-4adc-a5ee-69d4d631639d2022-03-26T19:31:12ZTHA for a fractured femoral neck: comparing the results of standard, large head, dual mobility, and constrained linersJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:6f87ee08-6714-4adc-a5ee-69d4d631639dEnglishSymplectic ElementsLippincott, Williams & Wilkins2020Hoskins, WGriffin, XHatton, ASteiger, RBingham, R<p><strong>Background:</strong> THA is a reasonable surgical option for some patients with fragility fractures of the femoral neck, but it has the risk of prosthesis dislocation. The prosthesis combination that reduces the risk of dislocation and the rate of revision surgery is not known.</p> <p><strong>Questions/purposes:</strong> In patients receiving primary THA for a femoral neck fracture, does (1) the rate of all-cause revision or (2) the reason for revision and rate of revision for dislocation differ among THA with a standard head size, large head size, dual mobility (DM), or constrained liner? (3) Is there a difference in the revision risk when patients are stratified by age at the time of surgery?</p> <p><strong>Methods:</strong> Data were analyzed for 16,692 THAs performed to treat fractures of the femoral neck reported in the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) from January 2008 to December 2018, as this included the first use of DM prostheses. The AOANJRR includes information on more than 98% of arthroplasty procedures performed in Australia. Most patients were female (72%) and the mean age was 74 years ± 11. There were 8582 standard-head prostheses, 5820 large-head prostheses, 1778 DM prostheses, and 512 constrained prostheses identified. The cumulative percent revision (CPR) was determined for all causes as well as CPR for dislocation. The time to the first revision was described using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship, with right censoring for death or closure of the database at the time of analysis. The unadjusted CPR was estimated each year of the first 10 years for standard heads, 10 years for large heads, 8 years for constrained liners, and 7 years for DM prostheses, with 95% confidence intervals using unadjusted pointwise Greenwood estimates. The results were adjusted for age, sex, femoral fixation, and head size where appropriate and were considered by age groups < 70 and ≥ 70 years.</p> <p><strong>Results:</strong> When adjusted for age, sex, femoral fixation and head size, there was no difference in the rate of all-cause revision at 7 years for any of the four groups. There was no difference in the rate of all-cause revision when patients were stratified by < 70 or ≥ 70 years of age. Dislocation was the most common reason for revision (32%). When analyzing revision for dislocation alone, large-head THA had a lower rate of revision for dislocation compared with standard head (HR 0.6 [95% CI 0.4 to 0.8]; p < 0.001) and DM prostheses had a lower rate of revision for dislocation than standard head for the first 3 months (HR 0.3 [95% CI 0.1 to 0.7]; p < 0.004) but not after this time point.</p> <p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> The Australian registry shows that there is no difference in the rate of all-cause revision for standard-head, large-head, DM prostheses or constrained liner THA after femoral neck fractures for all patients or for patients stratified into younger than 70 years and at least 70 years of age groups. Dislocation is the most common cause of revision. Large-head prostheses are associated with a lower revision risk for dislocation and DM prostheses have a lower rate of revision for dislocation than standard heads for the first 3 months only. Surgeons treating a femoral neck fracture with THA might consider a large head size if the diameter of the acetabulum will allow it and a DM prosthesis if a large head size is not possible. The age, life expectancy and level of function of patients with femoral neck fractures minimizes the potential long-term consequences of these prostheses. The lack of significant differences in survival between most prosthesis combinations means surgeons should continue to look for factors beyond head size and prosthesis to minimize dislocation and revision surgery.</p> <p><strong>Level of Evidence:</strong> Level III, therapeutic study.</p> |
| spellingShingle | Hoskins, W Griffin, X Hatton, A Steiger, R Bingham, R THA for a fractured femoral neck: comparing the results of standard, large head, dual mobility, and constrained liners |
| title | THA for a fractured femoral neck: comparing the results of standard, large head, dual mobility, and constrained liners |
| title_full | THA for a fractured femoral neck: comparing the results of standard, large head, dual mobility, and constrained liners |
| title_fullStr | THA for a fractured femoral neck: comparing the results of standard, large head, dual mobility, and constrained liners |
| title_full_unstemmed | THA for a fractured femoral neck: comparing the results of standard, large head, dual mobility, and constrained liners |
| title_short | THA for a fractured femoral neck: comparing the results of standard, large head, dual mobility, and constrained liners |
| title_sort | tha for a fractured femoral neck comparing the results of standard large head dual mobility and constrained liners |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT hoskinsw thaforafracturedfemoralneckcomparingtheresultsofstandardlargeheaddualmobilityandconstrainedliners AT griffinx thaforafracturedfemoralneckcomparingtheresultsofstandardlargeheaddualmobilityandconstrainedliners AT hattona thaforafracturedfemoralneckcomparingtheresultsofstandardlargeheaddualmobilityandconstrainedliners AT steigerr thaforafracturedfemoralneckcomparingtheresultsofstandardlargeheaddualmobilityandconstrainedliners AT binghamr thaforafracturedfemoralneckcomparingtheresultsofstandardlargeheaddualmobilityandconstrainedliners |