dc.contributor.author | Tsikandylakis, G | |
dc.contributor.author | Kärrholm, Johan | |
dc.contributor.author | Hallan, Geir | |
dc.contributor.author | Furnes, Ove | |
dc.contributor.author | Eskelinen, Antti | |
dc.contributor.author | Mäkelä, Keijo T. | |
dc.contributor.author | Pedersen, Alma B | |
dc.contributor.author | Overgaard, Søren | |
dc.contributor.author | Mohaddes, M. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-04-26T08:43:26Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-04-26T08:43:26Z | |
dc.date.created | 2020-12-18T09:19:19Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
dc.Published | Acta Orthopaedica. 2020, 91 (4), 401-407. | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1745-3674 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2739492 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background and purpose — 32-mm heads are widely used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) in Scandinavia, while the proportion of 36-mm heads is increasing as they are expected to increase THA stability. We investigated whether the use of 36-mm heads in THA after proximal femur fracture (PFF) is associated with a lower risk of revision compared with 32-mm heads.
Patients and methods — We included 5,030 patients operated with THA due to PFF with 32- or 36-mm heads from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database. Each patient with a 36-mm head was matched with a patient with a 32-mm head, using propensity score. The patients were operated between 2006 and 2016, with a metal or ceramic head on a polyethylene bearing. Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to estimate the unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for revision for any reason and revision due to dislocation for 36-mm heads compared with 32-mm heads.
Results — 36-mm heads had an HR of 0.9 (CI 0.7–1.2) for revision for any reason and 0.8 (CI 0.5–1.3) for revision due to dislocation compared with 32-mm heads at a median follow-up of 2.5 years (interquartile range 1–4.4).
Interpretation — We were not able to demonstrate any clinically relevant reduction of the risk of THA revision for any reason or due to dislocation when 36-mm heads were used versus 32-mm. Residual confounding due to lack of data on patient comorbidities and body mass index could bias our results. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | Taylor and Francis | en_US |
dc.rights | Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal | * |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no | * |
dc.title | Is there a reduction in risk of revision when 36-mm heads instead of 32 mm are used in total hip arthroplasty for patients with proximal femur fractures? | en_US |
dc.type | Journal article | en_US |
dc.type | Peer reviewed | en_US |
dc.description.version | publishedVersion | en_US |
dc.rights.holder | Copyright 2020 The Author(s). | en_US |
cristin.ispublished | true | |
cristin.fulltext | original | |
cristin.qualitycode | 1 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1080/17453674.2020.1752559 | |
dc.identifier.cristin | 1861371 | |
dc.source.journal | Acta Orthopaedica | en_US |
dc.source.40 | 91 | |
dc.source.14 | 4 | |
dc.source.pagenumber | 401–407 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Acta Orthopaedica. 2020, 91 (4), 401–407. | en_US |
dc.source.volume | 91 | en_US |
dc.source.issue | 4 | en_US |