4.6 Article

Mid-Term Survivals After Cementless Bipolar Hemiarthroplasty for Unstable Intertrochanteric Fractures in Elderly Patients

期刊

JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY
卷 33, 期 3, 页码 777-782

出版社

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE INC MEDICAL PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.10.027

关键词

hip; unstable intertrochanteric fracture; osteoporosis; bipolar hemiarthroplasty; cementless stem; fully porous coating

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fracture in elderly patients remains challenging. The purpose of this prospective study is to determine clinical and radiological results of cementless bipolar hemiarthroplasty using a fully porous-coated stem in osteoporotic elderly patients with unstable intertrochanteric fractures with follow-up over 5 years. Methods: From January 2010 to December 2011, we performed 123 cementless bipolar hemiarthroplasties using fully porous-coated stem to treat unstable intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients with osteoporosis. Clinical and radiographic evaluations were performed. Results: Fifty-three patients died and 14 patients were lost during the follow-up period. Mean follow-up period was 61.8 months postoperatively. Their mean Harris hip score was 77 points (range 36-100). None of these hips had loosening of the stem or osteolysis. Postoperative complications included nonunion of greater trochanter in 2 hips and dislocation in 2 hips. Two patients were reoperated due to periprosthetic fracture. One patient underwent implant revision due to periprosthetic infection. Thirty-one patients maintained walking activities similar to those before fracture. With follow-up period of 83 months, cumulative survival rates were 97.3% and 99.1% with reoperation for any reason and femoral stem revision as endpoint, respectively. Conclusion: Cementless bipolar hemiarthroplasty using a fully porous-coated stem is a useful surgical treatment option for unstable intertrochanteric fracture in elderly patients with osteoporosis. (c) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据