Single mini-incision has some perioperative advantages over standard-incision total hip replacement

The Frank Stinchfield Award: the impact of socioeconomic factors on outcome after THA: a prospective, randomized study

BACKGROUND

Most studies of total hip arthroplasty (THA) focus on the effect of the type of implant on the clinical result. Relatively little data are available on the impact of the patient's preoperative status and socioeconomic factors on the clinical results following THA.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We determined the relative importance of patient preoperative and socioeconomic status compared to implant and technique factors in predicting patient outcome as reflected by scores on commonly utilized rating scales (eg, Harris Hip Score, WOMAC, SF-12, degree of patient satisfaction, or presence or severity of thigh pain) following cementless THA.

METHODS

All patients during the study period were offered enrollment in a prospective, randomized study to receive either a titanium, tapered, proximally coated stem; or a Co-Cr, cylindrical, extensively coated stem; 102 patients were enrolled. We collected detailed patient data preoperatively including diagnosis, age, gender, insurance status, medical comorbidities, tobacco and alcohol use, household income, educational level, and history of treatment for lumbar spine pathology. Clinical evaluation included Harris Hip Score, SF-12, WOMAC, pain drawing, and UCLA activity rating and satisfaction questionnaire. Implant factors included stem type, stem size, fit in the canal, and stem-bone stiffness ratios. Minimum 2 year followup was obtained in 95% of the enrolled patients (102 patients).

RESULTS

Patient demographics and preoperative status were more important than implant factors in predicting the presence of thigh pain, dissatisfaction, and a low hip score. The most predictive factors were ethnicity, educational level, poverty level, income, and a low preoperative WOMAC score or preoperative SF-12 mental component score. No implant parameter correlated with outcome or satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Socioeconomic factors and preoperative status have more impact on the clinical outcome of cementless THA than implant related factors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, prospective, randomized clinical trial. See the guidelines online for a complete description of level of evidence.

Minimal incision surgery as a risk factor for early failure of total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Minimal incision total hip arthroplasty (MI THA) techniques were developed to decrease postoperative pain and recovery time. Although these techniques have increased in popularity, the long-term survivorship of these procedures is unknown.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We therefore investigated whether the time to revision in our referral practice was shorter for patients who underwent primary MI THA compared to primary traditional THA.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 46 revision THAs performed during a 3-year period. We excluded revisions performed for infection and rerevisions. Patients with incisions less than or equal to 10 cm were defined as having had MI THA. Fifteen of the 46 patients (33%) had undergone primary MI THA. At the time of primary index THA, the mean ages of the MI and non-MI patients were 65 years and 55 years, respectively.

RESULTS

The mean time to revision was 1.4 years for the MI patients compared with 14.7 years for the non-MI patients. Twelve of the 15 patients having MI THA required revision within 2 years of primary THA compared to 4 of the 31 patients without MI surgery (OR = 26.5, 95% CI 4.4-160.0). There were no differences between the groups with regard to age, gender, or body mass index. The most common reasons for revision in the MI THA group were intraoperative fracture and failure of femoral component osseointegration.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest MI THA may be a risk factor for early revision surgery and the long-term survival therefore may be lower than that for non-MI surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.