Journal
JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY
Volume 29, Issue 6, Pages 1248-+Publisher
CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE INC MEDICAL PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.11.027
Keywords
posterior approach; lateral approach; primary hip replacement; outcome scores; joint registry data
Categories
Funding
- National Joint Registry
Ask authors/readers for more resources
The posterior and lateral approaches to primary hip arthroplasty were compared using national data from England and Wales. Specific component combinations of the most commonly used cemented and cementless implant brands were analysed separately. There was no significant difference between the approaches for all-cause revision risk (cemented: P = 0.726, cementless: P = 0.295) and revision for dislocation (P = 0.176, P = 0.695) at 12 months following 37,593 procedures, after adjusting for patient and surgical variables. Analysis of 3881 linked episodes found the posterior approach was associated with significantly higher improvement in function (Oxford Hip Score: 20.8 versus 18.9, P < 0.001 (cemented procedures); 21.7 versus 20.2, P = 0.008 (cementless), EQ5D index: 0.416 versus 0.383, P = 0.003; 0.431 versus 0.384, P = 0.003). The posterior approach may offer a functional benefit (albeit small clinically), without increased revision risk. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available