Does Implant Selection Impact Postoperative Complications Following Hip Arthroplasty for Failed Intertrochanteric Fractures? A Retrospective Comparative Study. Issue 8 (27th January 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Tsai, Shang‐Wen; Chen, Cheng‐Fong; Wu, Po‐Kuei; Huang, Ching‐Kuei; Chen, Wei‐Ming; Chang, Ming‐Chau
• Is Part Of: Artificial organs. Volume 40:Issue 8(2016:Aug.)
• Page Start: 798
• Page End: 804
• Publication Date: 2016-01-27
• Subjects: Complication -- Failure -- Hip arthroplasty -- Intertrochanteric fractures -- Salvage; Artificial organs -- Periodicals; 617.956
• DOI: 10.1111/aor.12676
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0160-564X

Abstract

Abstract: The purpose of this study is to compare postoperative complications among different acetabular and femoral components of hip arthroplasty for failed intertrochanteric fractures. A total of 79 patients were included and followed‐up for an average of 75.6 months (range, 24–244). Fifty‐five patients underwent total hip arthroplasty, and 24 had bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Cementless metaphyseal locking, cementless diaphyseal locking, and cemented standard stems were used in 41, 29, and 9 patients, respectively. Dislocation and wear rate were not different between the total hip arthroplasty and bipolar hemiarthroplasty groups. Stem subsidence or loosening was more frequently found in the cementless, metaphyseal locking stem groups. In conclusion, cemented standard stem and cementless diaphyseal locking stem might be better implant choices. With regard to dislocation rate, our results were insufficient to conclude a better implant choice of total hip arthroplasty or bipolar hemiarthroplasty than the other.