160型生物型翻修柄在股骨侧翻修的短期疗效

Short-term clinical outcome of 160™biological revision stem for femoral side revision

目的评价160生物型翻修柄在股骨侧翻修中的短期疗效。方法回顾分析2017年8月至2019年9月在广东省中医院接受春立160型柄股骨侧翻修的患者,评估术前及末次随访的临床及影像学表现,并与同时期行强生Solution柄翻修患者进行比较,术前及末次随访时患者的人工髋关节疗效评分(Harris评分)和牛津大学髋关节评分(OHS评分)采用配对样本t检验,组间比较采用独立样本t检验。结果共有35例患者符合标准、纳入研究并完成随访,其中160型柄组(观察组)患者18名,Solution柄组(对照组)患者17名。与术前相比,观察组患者Harris评分由(34±8)分提高至(72±7)分(t=-13.91,P<0.001),对照组则由(30±6)分提高至(68±11)分(t=-10.98,P<0.001)。观察组患者OHS评分由(30±8)分降至(16±9)分(t=9.40,P<0.001)。对照组患者OHS评分由(34±2)分降至(16±2)分(t=16.05,P<0.001)。两组患者术后Harris评分及OHS评分差异无统计学意义(t=-1.41、0.19,均为P>0.05)。影像学显示假体固定牢靠,两组患者在假体下沉距离和假体松动评级中差异无统计学意义(Z=-0.857、-0.474,均为P>0.05)。结论160生物型翻修柄在髋关节翻修患者的短期随访中表现良好,短期疗效与Solution柄相当,长期疗效有待进一步观察。

Objective To evaluate the short term efficacy of 160 biological revision handle in femoral revision.Methods The patients who underwent the femoral revision of Chunli 160?handle in Guangdong Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine from August 2017 to September 2019 were retrospectively analyzed.The clinical and imaging manifestations before and at the last follow-up were evaluated and compared with the patients who underwent the revision of Johnson’s Solution?handle at the same time.The efficacy score of artificial hip joint(Harris score)and the hip score of Oxford University were evaluated before and at the last follow-up(OHS score).The paired sample t test was used,and independent sample t test was used for inter-group comparison.Results A total of 35 patients who met the criteria were enrolled with completed follow-up,including 18 patients in the Chunli 160?handle group(the observation group)and 17 patients in the Solution?handle group(the control group).The Harris score of the observation group increased from preoperative(34±8)to postoperative(72±7)(t=-13.91,P<0.001),the control group increased from preoperative(30±6)to postoperative(68±11)(t=-10.98,P<0.001).The OHS score of the observation group decreased from preoperative(30±8)to postoperative(16±9)(t=9.40,P<0.001).The OHS score of the control group decreased from preoperative(34±2)to postoperative(16±2)(t=16.05,P<0.001)There was no statistically significant difference in the postoperative Harris score and OHS score between the two groups(t=-1.41,0.19,both P>0.05).Imaging showed that the prosthesis was firmly fixed,and there was no significant difference in prosthesis sinking distance and prosthesis loosening rating between the two groups(Z=-0.857,-0.474,both P>0.05).Conclusions The 160?biological revision handle performs well in the short-term follow-up of hip revision patients.The short-term curative effect is equivalent to that of solution handle,and the long-term curative effect needs to be further observed.