A comparison of Cemented with Hybrid Total Hip Arthroplasty in Terms of Funtional Outcome. | [Isra Medical Journal • 2017]

Author(s):

1. Muhammad Sheraz Mustafa: Benazir Bhutto Hospital (BBH), Rawalpindi, Pakistan

2. Junaid Khan: Benazir Bhutto Hospital (BBH), Rawalpindi, Pakistan

3. Riaz Ahmed: Benazir Bhutto Hospital (BBH), Rawalpindi, Pakistan

4. Tayyab Ahmad: Rawalpindi Medical College & Allied Teaching Hospitals, Rawalpindi, Pakistan

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: To compare the functional outcome of cemented total hip with hybrid total hip arthroplasty in terms of mean change in pain score. STUDY DESIGN: A Randomized controlled study. PLACE AND DURATION: At Benazir Bhutto Hospital, Rawalpindi, Pakistan for a duration of 06 months from 2nd March 2015 to 1st August 2015. METHODOLOGY: Study patients who had osteoarthritis hip (primary and secondary) under-going arthroplasty were divided into groups, A and B. Group A underwent hybrid total hip while cemented total hip for group B patients. Post-operative pain scoring was done in each group with visual analog pain scale (VAS) at 4, 8 and 12 weeks interval to find the improvement after arthroplasty in terms of pain relief and a comparison was done between two groups. RESULTS: Group A (62.67±10.48) patients had a significantly lower mean pain score than group B (68.33±7.92) at 8th(p=0.022) and 12th week (p=0.005) follow-up. CONCLUSION: Functional outcome of hybrid total hip is better as compared to cemented total hip in terms of mean change in pain score.

Page(s): 257-260

DOI: DOI not available

Published: Journal: Isra Medical Journal, Volume: 9, Issue: 4, Year: 2017

Keywords:

Keywords are not available for this article.

References:

[1] LeeJM, 2016.The current concepts of total hip arthroplasty,Hip Pelvis 28 191 -200

[2] MushtaqS,ChoudharyR,ScanzelloCR, 2011.Non-surgical treatment of osteoarthritis-related pain in the elderly,Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 4 113 -22

[3] HamelMB,TothM,LegedzaA,RosenMP, 2008.Joint replacement surgery in elderly patients with severe osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: decision making, postoperative recovery, and clinical outcomes,Arch Intern Med 168 1430 -40

[4] LeeMC,EbersonCP, 2006.Growth and development of the child's hip,Orthop Clin N Am 37 119 -32

[5] ScaglioneM,FabbriL,CelliF,CasellaF,GuidoG, 2015.Hip replacement in femoral head osteonecrosis: current concepts,Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab 12 51 -54

[6] AhmadI,HayatS., 2005.Cemented total hip replacement inpatients younger than fifty years of age,J Postgraduate Medical Institute 19 416 -19

[7] DuffyPJ,MasriBA,GarbuzDS,DuncanCP, 2005.Evaluation of patients with pain following total hip replacement,J Bone Joint Surg 87 256 -75

[8] LindalenE,DahlJ,NordslettenL,SnorrasonF,HovikO,RohrlS., 2012.Reverse hybrid and cemented hip replacement compared using radiostereometry and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry,Acta Orthop 83 592 -98

[9] KandelL,RivkinG,FriedmanA,SegalD,LiebergallM,MattanY., 2009.Polyethylene liner cementation technique in a sy m p to m at i c ve rs u s sy m p to m at i c o ste o l ys i s,Orthopedics 32 560 -65

[10] AchtenJ,ParsonsNR,EdlinRP,GriffinDR,CostaML, 2010.A randomised controlled trial of total hip arthroplasty versus resurfacing arthroplasty in the treatment of young patients with arthritis of the hip joint,BMC MusculoskeletDisord 11 1 -6

[11] SHZaki,SSadiq,B Purbach, 2007.Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures Treated with a Modular Distally Cemented Stem,J Orthop Surg 15 163 -66

[12] KimH,KookHK,KimJS, 2002.Total hip replacement with cement less acetabular component and a cemented femoral component in patients younger than fifty years of age,J Bone Joint Surg Am 84 70 -74

[13] HermidaJC,BergulaA,ChenP,CowellC W,D'Lima DD, 2003.Comparison of the wear rates of twenty-eight and thirtytwo millimeter femoral heads on cross-linked polyethylene acetabular cups in wear simulator,J Bone Joint Surg Am 85 325 -31

[14] BettencourtA,CaladoA,AmaralJ,AlfaiaA,ValeFM,MonteiroJ, 2004.Surface studies on acrylic bone cement,Int J Pharm 278 181 -86

[15] KarimAA,EllantiP,MotterliniN,FaheyT,O'Byrne JM, 2013.Cemented versus uncemented fixation in total hip replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials,Orthop Rev (Pavia) 5 34 -44

[16] KimYH,KimJS,ParkJW,JooJH, 2011.Comparison of total hip replacement with and without cement in patients younger than 50 years of age: the results at 18 years,J Bone Joint Surg Br 93 449 -55

[17] NiGX,LuWW,ChiuKY, 2005.Review article: Cemented or uncemented femoral component in primary total hip replacement? A review from a clinical and radiological perspective,J Orthop Surg 13 96 -105

[18] ToossiN,AdeliB,TimperleyAJ,HaddadFS,MaltenfortM,ParviziJ,Is There Evidence That Cementless Fixation Is Better? J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2013., 95 168 -74

[19] WyattM,HooperG,FramptonC, 2014.Rothwell A. Survival outcomes of cemented compared to uncemented stems in primary total hip replacement,World J Orthop 5 91 -96

[20] PhedyP,IsmailHD,HooC,DjajaYP, 2017.Total hip replacement: A meta-analysis to evaluate survival of cemented, cementless and hybrid implants,World J Orthop 8 192 -207

[21] ChammoutG,MurenO,LaurencikasE,BodensH,PattersonPK, 2016.More complications with uncemented than cemented femoral stems in total hip replacement for displaced femoral neck fractures in the elderly,Acta Orthopaedica 18 1 -7

[22] SrikanthVk,FryerJL,ZhaiG,WinzenbergTM,HosmerD,JonesG., 2005.A meta-analysis of sex differences prevalence, incidence and severity of osteoarthritis,Osteoarthritis & Cartilage 13 769 -81

[23] NathR,GuptaAK,ChakravartyU,NathR, 2010.Primary cemented total hip arthroplasty: 10 years follow-up,Indian J Orthop 44 283 -88

[24] TroelsenA,MalchauE,SillesenN,MalchauH., 2013.A Review of Current Fixation Use and Registry Outcomes in Total Hip Arthroplasty: The Uncemented Paradox,Clin Orthop Relat Res 471 2052 -59

[25] HooperGJ,RothwellAG,StringerM,FamptonC, 2015.Revision following cemented and uncemented primary total hip replacement,J Bone Joint Surg 91 451 -58

Citations

Downloads

Views