4.3 Article

Orthopaedic surgery for inhibitor patients:: a series of 27 procedures (25 patients)

Journal

HAEMOPHILIA
Volume 13, Issue 5, Pages 613-619

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2516.2007.01520.x

Keywords

haemophilia; inhibitors; orthopaedic surgery

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We report on a series of 27 orthopaedic surgical procedures. It includes 20 radiosynoviortheses and seven major orthopaedic procedures, performed on 26 patients. The average age of patients was 36 years (range: 8-53) and the average follow-up time was 2.5 years (range:1-5). There were 23 good results and four fair. In the synoviorthesis group (20 patients, 20 synoviortheses) the average age was 13.5 years (range: 9-26) and the average follow-up was 4.5 years (range: 1-7). There were 19 good results and one fair. All synoviortheses were done with activated prothrombin complex concentrates (FEIBA), all the responses being good except in one case (which had the final fair result). The total dose of FEIBA used was 600 IU kg(-1,) except in a patient that had a haemorrhagic complication. In fact, he required a prolongation of treatment up to a total dose of 2000 IU kg(-1). In the group of major orthopaedic procedures, the average age of the six patients was 30.5 years (range: 11-53) and the average follow-up was 2.5 years (range: 1-5). There were six good results and one fair. Postoperative bleeding complications occurred in one of the seven major orthopaedic procedures performed (arterial pseudoaneurym after a total knee arthroplasty). Despite such complication, which had the final fair result, our study has shown that haemophilic patients with high inhibitor titres requiring orthopaedic surgery can undergo such procedures with a high expectation of success. In other words, orthopaedic surgery is now possible in haemophilia patients with high-titre inhibitors, leading to an improved quality of life for these patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available