...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders >Risk factors and modes of failure in the modern dual mobility implant. A systematic review and meta-analysis
【24h】

Risk factors and modes of failure in the modern dual mobility implant. A systematic review and meta-analysis

机译:现代双行动植入物的危险因素和失效模式。 系统审查和荟萃分析

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The aims of this meta-analysis were to: (1) validate the outcome of modern dual mobility (DM) designs in patients who had undergone primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) procedures and (2) to identify factors that affect the outcome. We searched for studies that assessed the outcome of modern DM-THA in primary and revision procedures that were conducted between January, 2000 to August, 2020 on PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Reviews and Embase. The pooled incidence of the most common failure modes and patient reported outcomes were evaluated in patients who have received: (1) primary THA, (2) revision THA for all causes or (3) for recurrent dislocation. A meta-regression analysis was performed for each parameter to determine the association with the outcome. The study design of each study was assessed for potential bias and flaws by using the quality assessment tool for case series studies. A total of 119 studies (N= 30016 DM-THAs) were included for analysis. The mean follow-up duration was 47.3 months. The overall implant failure rate was 4.2% (primary: 2.3%, revision for all causes: 5.5%, recurrent dislocation: 6.0%). The most common failure modes were aseptic loosening (primary: 0.9%, revision for all causes: 2.2%, recurrent dislocation: 2.4%), septic loosening (primary:0.8%, revision for all causes: 2.3%, recurrent dislocation: 2.5%), extra-articular dislocation (primary:0.6%, revision for all causes:1.3%, recurrent dislocation:2.5%), intra-prosthetic dislocation (primary:0.8%, revision for all causes:1.0%, recurrent dislocation:1.6%) and periprosthetic fracture (primary:0.9%, revision for all causes:0.9%, recurrent dislocation:1.3%). The multi-regression analysis identified younger age (β=-0.04, 95% CI -0.07 – -0.02) and female patients (β=3.34, 95% CI 0.91–5.78) were correlated with higher implant failure rate. Age, gender, posterolateral approach and body mass index (BMI) were not risk factors for extra-articular or intra-prosthetic dislocation in this cohort. The overall Harris hip score and Merle d’Aubigné score were 84.87 and 16.36, respectively. Level of evidence of this meta-analysis was IV. Modern dual-mobility designs provide satisfactory mid-term implant survival and clinical performance. Younger age and female patients might impact the outcome after DM-THA. Future research directions should focus on, (1) long-term outcome of modern dual-mobility design, including specific concerns such as intra-prosthetic dislocation and elevated metal ion, and (2) cost-effectiveness analysis of dual-mobility implant as an alternative to conventional THA for patients who are at high risk of dislocation.
机译:该荟萃分析的目的是:(1)验证经历过初级和修订总髋关节关节置换术(THA)程序和(2)以确定影响结果的因素的患者的现代双部流动性(DM)设计的结果。 。我们搜索了在2000年1月至8月至8月,2020年在PubMed,Medline,Cochrane评论和EMBASE进行的主要和修订程序中评估了近代和修订程序的近代和修订程序的研究。在收到的患者中评估了最常见的失效模式和患者报告的结果的汇总发生率:(1)初级素,(2)修订版的所有原因或(3)进行复发错位。对每个参数进行元回归分析以确定与结果的关联。每个研究的研究设计通过使用案例系列研究的质量评估工具,评估潜在的偏差和缺陷。共有119项研究(n = 30016dm-thas)进行分析。平均随访时间为47.3个月。整体植入物失效率为4.2%(初级:2.3%,所有原因的修订:5.5%,复发错位:6.0%)。最常见的失效模式是无菌松动(初级:0.9%,所有原因的修订:2.2%,复发性脱位:2.4%),化粪池松动(初级:0.8%,所有原因修订:2.3%,复发错位:2.5% ),关节脱位(初级:0.6%,修订所有原因:1.3%,复发性脱位:2.5%),假脱位脱位(初级:0.8%,修订所有原因:1.0%,复发错位:1.6% )和PeriproSthetth骨折(初级:0.9%,修订所有原因:0.9%,复发错位:1.3%)。多元回归分析确定了较小的年龄(β= -0.04,95%CI -0.07 - -0.02)和女性患者(β= 3.34,95%CI 0.91-5.78)与较高的植入物失效率相关。年龄,性别,后侧方法和体重指数(BMI)对此队列中的外关节或假体脱位的危险因素没有危险因素。整体Harris评分和梅尔D'欧比涅得分分别为84.87和16.36。该荟萃分析的证据水平是IV。现代的双动设计提供了良好的中期植入生存和临床表现。年轻的年龄和女性患者可能会影响DM-THA后的结果。未来的研究方向应专注于,(1)现代双迁移型设计的长期结果,包括特定的疑虑,例如假脱位脱位和升高的金属离子,以及(2)双迁移型植入物的成本效益分析常规THA的替代方法对于处于脱位的高风险。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号