Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Source
    • Language
15,807 result(s) for "hip replacement"
Sort by:
Cemented versus Uncemented Hemiarthroplasty for Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures: 5-year Followup of a Randomized Trial
Background Displaced femoral neck fractures usually are treated with hemiarthroplasty. However, the degree to which the design of the implant used (cemented or uncemented) affects the outcome is not known and may be therapeutically important. Questions/purposes In this randomized controlled trial, we sought to compare cemented with cementless fixation in bipolar hemiarthroplasties at 5 years in terms of (1) Harris hip scores; (2) femoral fractures; (3) overall health outcomes using the Barthel Index and EQ-5D scores; and (4) complications, reoperations, and mortality since our earlier report on this cohort at 1-year followup. Methods We present followup at a median of 5 years after surgery (range, 56–65 months) from a randomized trial comparing a cemented hemiarthroplasty (112 hips) with an uncemented, hydroxyapatite-coated hemiarthroplasty (108 hips), both with a bipolar head. Results were previously reported at 1-year followup. Harris hip scores, Barthel Index, and EQ-5D scores were assessed by one research nurse and one orthopaedic surgeon. Complications and reoperations were determined by chart review and radiographs examined by three orthopaedic surgeons. Sixty patients (56%) had died in the cemented group and 63 (60%) in the uncemented group. Respectively, three and two patients (2.7% and 1.9%) were completely lost to followup. Results Harris hip scores at 5 years were higher in the uncemented group than in the cemented group (86.2 versus 76.3; mean difference 9.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9–17.9). The prevalence of postoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures was 7.4% in the uncemented group and 0.9% in the cemented group (hazard ratio [HR], 9.3; 95% CI, 1.16–74.5). Barthel Index and EQ-5D scores were not different between the groups. Between 1 and 5 years, we found no additional infections or dislocations. The mortality rate was not different between the groups (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.82–1.7). Conclusions Both arthroplasties may be used with good medium-term results after displaced femoral neck fractures. The uncemented hemiarthroplasty may result in higher hip scores but appears to carry an unacceptably high risk of later femoral fractures. Level of Evidence Level I, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Two-Year Evaluation of Mandatory Bundled Payments for Joint Replacement
In 2016, Medicare started mandatory bundled payment for joint-replacement surgery in randomly selected areas. Hospitals receive bonuses or pay penalties based on spending through 90 days after discharge. In the first 2 years, there was a slight reduction in spending.
Comparison of outcome measures and complication rates following three different approaches for primary total hip arthroplasty: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial
Background Total hip arthroplasty is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures worldwide. There are a number of surgical approaches for total hip arthroplasty and no high-level evidence supporting one approach over the other. Each approach has its unique benefits and drawbacks. This trial aims to directly compare the three most common surgical approaches for total hip arthroplasty. Methods/design This is a single-centre study conducted at Western Health, Melbourne, Australia; a large metropolitan centre. It is a pragmatic, parallel three-arm, randomised controlled trial. Sample size will be 243 participants (81 in each group). Randomisation will be secure, web-based and managed by an independent statistician. Patients and research team will be blinded pre-operatively, but not post-operatively. Intervention will be either direct anterior, lateral or posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty, and the three arms will be directly compared. Participants will be aged over 18 years, able to provide informed consent and recruited from our outpatients. Patients who are having revision surgery or have indications for hip replacement other than osteoarthritis (i.e., fracture, malignancy, development dysplasia) will be excluded from the trial. The Oxford Hip Score will be determined for patients pre-operatively and 6 weeks, 6, 12 and 24 months post-operatively. The Oxford Hip Score at 24 months will be the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures will be dislocation, infection, intraoperative and peri-prosthetic fracture rate, length of hospital stay and pain level, reported using a visual analogue scale. Discussion Many studies have evaluated approaches for total hip arthroplasty and arthroplasty registries worldwide are now collecting this data. However no study to date has compared these three common approaches directly in a randomised fashion. No trial has used patient-reported outcome measures to evaluate success. This pragmatic study aims to identify differences in patient perception of total hip arthroplasty depending on surgical approach. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617000272392 . Registered on 22 February 2017.
What Works Best, a Cemented or Cementless Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?: Minimum 17-year Followup of a Randomized Controlled Trial
Background Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been associated with high survival rates, but debate remains concerning the best fixation mode of THA. Questions/purposes We conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT) with 250 patients with a mean age of 64 years between October 1987 and January 1992 to compare the results of cementless and cemented fixation. Patients and Methods Patients were evaluated for revision of either of the components. One hundred twenty-seven patients had died (51%) and 12 (4.8%) were lost to followup. The minimum 17-year followup data (mean, 20 years; range, 17–21 years) for 52 patients of the cementless group and 41 patients of the cemented group were available for evaluation. Results Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis at 20 years revealed lower survival rates of cemented compared with cementless THA. The cementless tapered stem was associated with a survivorship of 99%. Age younger than 65 years and male gender were predictors of revision surgery. Conclusions The efficacy of future RCTs can be enhanced by randomizing patients in specific patient cohorts stratified to age and gender in multicenter RCTs. Including only younger patients might improve the efficacy of a future RCT with smaller sample sizes being required. A minimum 10-year followup should be anticipated, but this can be expected to be longer if the difference in level of quality between the compared implants is smaller. Level of Evidence Level I, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
A prospective randomized comparison of the minimally invasive direct anterior and the transgluteal approach for primary total hip arthroplasty
Background The presented prospective randomized controlled single-centre study compares the clinical outcome up to 12 months after total hip arthroplasty using a minimally invasive single-incision direct anterior (DAA) and a direct transgluteal lateral approach. Methods A total of 123 arthroplasties were evaluated utilizing the Harris Hip Score (HHS), the extra short musculoskeletal functional assessment questionnaire (XSFMA), the Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey, a Stepwatch™ Activity Monitor (SAM), and a timed 25 m foot walk (T25-FW). Postoperative x-ray images after THA were reviewed to determine inclination and stem positioning. Results At final follow-up, the XSFMA functional index scores were 10.3 (anterior) and 15.08 (lateral) while the bother index summed up to a score of 15.8 (anterior) and 21.66 (lateral) respectively, thus only differing significantly for the functional index ( p  = 0.040 and p  = 0.056). The SF-36 physical component score (PCS) was 47.49 (anterior) and 42.91 (lateral) while the mental component score (MCS) summed up to 55.0 (anterior) and 56.23 (lateral) with a significant difference evident for the PCS ( p  = 0.017; p  = 0.714). Patients undergoing THA through a DAA undertook a mean of 6402 cycles per day while those who had undergone THA through a transgluteal approach undertook a mean of 5340 cycles per day ( p  = 0.012). Furthermore, the obtained outcome for the T25-FW with 18.4 s (anterior) and 19.75 s (lateral) and the maximum walking distance (5932 m and 5125 m) differed significantly ( p  = 0.046 and p  = 0.045). The average HHS showed no significant difference equaling 92.4 points in the anterior group and 91.43 in the lateral group ( p  = 0.477). The radiographic analysis revealed an average cup inclination of 38.6° (anterior) and 40.28° (lateral) without signs of migration. Conclusion In summary, our outcomes show that after 1 year THA through the direct anterior approach results in a higher patient activity compared to THA utilizing a transgluteal lateral approach while no differences regarding hip function are evident. Trial registration DRKS00014808 (German Clinical Trial Register DRKS); date of registration: 31.05.2018.
Comparison of supercapsular percutaneously assisted approach total hip versus conventional posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized controlled trial
Background Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been one of the most successful orthopedic procedures over the past 30 years. Nowadays, the techniques of exposure for THA have undergone great changes, allowing surgeons to perform THA through mini-incisions. Recently, a novel minimally invasive surgical technique of the supercapsular percutaneously assisted total hip arthroplasty was reported in 2011. The purpose of this study was to compare the SuperPath approach with the conventional posterior approach, in terms early outcomes and radiologic results. Methods Ninety-two consecutive unilateral primary hip osteoarthritis adult patients were randomly divided into two groups. Forty-six patients (SuperPath group) were operated on using the SuperPath approach, and 46 patients (conventional group) were operated on with the conventional posterior approach. Outcomes were evaluated using preoperative index, intraoperative data, and postoperative function data. The positioning of the implants was analyzed by radiography. Results No significant difference was detected in skin-to-skin operation time, blood loss, transfusion rate, postoperative complications, abduction angle, anteversion angle, and stem alignments. The incision length and length of stay (LOS) in the SuperPath group were significantly lower. The VAS score in the SuperPath group at the 1-week, 1-month and 3-month postoperative intervals were lower than those VAS scores in the conventional group. The Harris Hip Score and Barthel Index (BI) for Activities of Daily Living in the SuperPath group were significantly higher at the 1- and 3-month follow-up intervals and were not significantly different 1 year after operation. Conclusions This prospective randomized study reveals that the SuperPath technique was associated with shorter LOS, earlier time to walk and climb, and lower postoperative pain levels. It also allowed early postoperative rehabilitation and faster recovery than conventional technique.
The learning curve of a novel seven-axis robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty system: a randomized controlled trial
Bacground The aim of this study was to assess the learning curve of a novel seven-axis robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RaTHA) system. Methods A total of 59 patients who underwent unilateral total hip arthroplasty at our institution from June 2022 to September 2022 were prospectively included in the study. In this randomized controlled clinical trial, robot-assisted THA (RaTHA) and Conventional THA (CoTHA) were performed using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis to evaluate the learning curve of the RaTHA system. The demographic data, preopera1tive clinical data, duration of operation, postoperative Harris Hip Score (HHS), postoperative Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score, and duration of operation between the learning stage and the proficiency stage of the RaTHA group were compared between the two groups. Results The average duration of operation of the RaTHA group was increased by 34.73 min compared with the CoTHA group (104.26 ± 19.33 vs. 69.53 ± 18.38 min, p  < 0.01). The learning curve of the RaTHA system can be divided into learning stage and proficiency stage, and the former consists of the first 13 cases by CUSUM analysis. In the RaTHA group, the duration of operation decreased by 29.75 min in the proficiency stage compared to the learning stage (121.12 ± 12.84 vs.91.37 ± 12.92, p  < 0.01). Conclusions This study demonstrated that the surgical team required a learning curve of 13 cases to become proficient using the RaTHA system. The duration of operation, total blood loss, and drainage gradually shortened (decreased) with the learning curve stage, and the differences were statistically significant. Trial registration Number: ChiCTR2200061630, Date: 29/06/2022.
Comparative Epidemiology of Revision Arthroplasty: Failed THA Poses Greater Clinical and Economic Burdens Than Failed TKA
Background Revision THA and TKA are growing and important clinical and economic challenges. Healthcare systems tend to combine revision joint replacement procedures into a single service line, and differences between revision THA and revision TKA remain incompletely characterized. These differences carry implications for guiding care and resource allocation. We therefore evaluated epidemiologic trends associated with revision THAs and TKAs. Questions/purposes We sought to determine differences in (1) the number of patients undergoing revision TKA and THA and respective demographic trends; (2) differences in the indications for and types of revision TKA and THA; (3) differences in patient severity of illness scoring between THA and TKA; and (4) differences in resource utilization (including cost and length of stay [LOS]) between revision THA and TKA. Methods The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) was used to evaluate 235,857 revision THAs and 301,718 revision TKAs between October 1, 2005 and December 31, 2010. Patient characteristics, procedure information, and resource utilization were compared across revision THAs and TKAs. A revision burden (ratio of number of revisions to total number of revision and primary surgeries) was calculated for hip and knee procedures. Severity of illness scoring and cost calculations were derived from the NIS. As our study was principally descriptive, statistical analyses generally were not performed; however, owing to the large sample size available to us through this NIS analysis, even small observed differences presented are likely to be highly statistically significant. Results Revision TKAs increased by 39% (revision burden, 9.1%–9.6%) and THAs increased by 23% (revision burden, 15.4%–14.6%). Revision THAs were performed more often in older patients compared with revision TKAs. Periprosthetic joint infection (25%) and mechanical loosening (19%) were the most common reasons for revision TKA compared with dislocation (22%) and mechanical loosening (20%) for revision THA. Full (all-component) revision was more common in revision THAs (43%) than in TKAs (37%). Patients who underwent revision THA generally were sicker (> 50% major severity of illness score) than patients who underwent revision TKA (65% moderate severity of illness score). Mean LOS was longer for revision THAs than for TKAs. Mean hospitalization costs were slightly higher for revision THA (USD 24,697 +/− USD 40,489 [SD]) than revision TKA (USD 23,130 +/− USD 36,643 [SD]). Periprosthetic joint infection and periprosthetic fracture were associated with the greatest LOS and costs for revision THAs and TKAs. Conclusions These data could prove important for healthcare systems to appropriately allocate resources to hip and knee procedures: the revision burden for THA is 52% greater than for TKA, but revision TKAs are increasing at a faster rate. Likewise, the treating clinician should understand that while both revision THAs and TKAs bear significant clinical and economic costs, patients undergoing revision THA tend to be older, sicker, and have greater costs of care.
Enhanced recovery after surgery: nursing strategy for total hip arthroplasty in older adult patients
Background The incidence of total hip arthroplasty (THA) is dramatically increasing, particularly in older adults. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been used in the postoperative care of patients undergoing surgical treatment. Aims This study compared the effects of ERAS and regular nursing on older adult patients undergoing THA to evaluate ERAS’s potential in patients’ postoperative care. Methods Ninety older adult patients (age ≥ 60 years) who underwent THA were enrolled and randomly divided into two groups: regular and ERAS nursing strategies. The ERAS nursing strategy was optimized based on regular nursing in terms of pain management, nutrition management, intestinal preparation, drainage tube nursing, catheter nursing, and normothermia maintenance. The efficiency of the two nursing strategies was evaluated from the perspectives of postoperative pain, hospitalization conditions, hip function, daily life ability, complications, and satisfaction. Results The ERAS group showed earlier first aerofluxus, getting out of bed, and defecation; the moving distance after getting out of bed was greater than that in the regular group. The removal of urinary and drainage tubes was also earlier in the ERAS group than in the regular group. ERAS significantly alleviated postoperative pain, increased Harris scores and the Barthel index, reduced hospitalization duration and expenses, and lowered the occurrence of complications. The ERAS group also showed higher satisfaction levels than the regular group. Conclusions This single-blind randomized controlled trial showed that the ERAS nursing strategy reduced pain, length and cost of hospital stay, and incidence of complications after THA compared with regular care. Therefore, ERAS nursing strategies are recommended to improve the postoperative recovery rates in older adult patients undergoing THA.
Direct anterior versus posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty: a multicentre, prospective, randomized clinical trial
The ideal approach for a total hip arthroplasty (THA) would be kind to soft tissues, have the lowest complication rates and be easily reproducible. Although there have been several attempts to find the best approach for THA in the last decade, a definitive answer has not been found. We performed a prospective study to compare the direct anterior and posterior approaches for THA in terms of hospital length of stay, functional outcome, pain, implant position, complications and surgical time. A prospective, randomized, multicentre clinical study was conducted between February 2011 and July 2013, with an average follow-up of 55 months. Patients undergoing the direct anterior or posterior approach for THA were enrolled. Hospital length of stay, surgical time and complications were documented. The Harris Hip Score and visual analogue scale were used to monitor functional outcome and pain until 5 years postoperatively. Radiologic analysis was used to assess implant position. Fifty-five patients (28 undergoing the direct anterior approach, 27 undergoing the posterior approach) were enrolled in this study. Length of stay, functional outcome, pain, implant position and complications were similar for the 2 approaches. There was a trend toward a better functional outcome for patients who underwent the direct anterior approach in the first 3 months postoperatively, with a peak at 4 weeks (Harris Hip Score 76.7 v. 68.7; p = 0.08). Average surgical time for the direct anterior approach was significantly longer (69.9 v. 45.7 min; p = 0.002). The direct anterior approach for THA appears to be a safe and effective option. However, there is no significant difference in hospital length of stay or postoperative recovery between the 2 approaches. Clinicaltrials.gov, no. NCT03673514 L’approche idéale pour l’arthroplastie totale de la hanche (ATH) serait douce pour les tissus mous, aurait le taux de complications le plus bas et serait facilement reproductible. Dans les 10 dernières années, on a tenté à de nombreuses reprises de déterminer quelle est la meilleure approche, sans obtenir de réponse concluante. Nous avons mené une étude prospective visant à comparer la durée du séjour à l’hôpital, les résultats fonctionnels, la douleur, la position de l’implant, les complications et le temps de chirurgie associés aux approches antérieure directe et postérieure pour l’ATH. Un essai clinique randomisé prospectif multicentrique a été mené auprès de patients ayant subi une ATH par voie antérieure directe ou postérieure entre février 2011 et juillet 2013; le suivi moyen était de 55 mois. La durée du séjour à l’hôpital, le temps de chirurgie et les complications ont été notés. Le score de Harris pour la hanche et l’échelle analogique visuelle ont servi au suivi des résultats fonctionnels et de la douleur dans les 5 ans suivant l’opération. Des clichés radiologiques ont été analysés pour évaluer la position de l’implant. Au total, 55 patients ont été recrutés (28 ayant subi une ATH par voie antérieure directe, et 27, une ATH par voie postérieure). La durée du séjour, les résultats fonctionnels, la douleur, la position de l’implant et les complications étaient sensiblement les mêmes, quelle que soit l’approche utilisée. Dans les 3 premiers mois suivant l’opération, les patients ayant subi une ATH par voie antérieure directe avaient tendance à présenter de meilleurs résultats fonctionnels que les autres, en particulier à la quatrième semaine postopératoire (score de Harris pour la hanche : 76,7 c. 68,7; p = 0,08). Le temps de chirurgie moyen pour l’approche antérieure directe était significativement plus long (69,9 c. 45,7 min; p = 0,002). La voie antérieure directe semble être une approche efficace et sûre. Aucune différence significative n’a toutefois été observée entre les 2 approches quant à la durée du séjour à l’hôpital ou au rétablissement postopératoire. ClinicalTrials.gov, no NCT03673514