The Journal of arthroplasty · 2020
Corrosion Concerns? Trends in Metal-on-Polyethylene Total Hip Arthroplasty Revision Rates and Comparisons Against Ceramic-on-Polyethylene up to 10 Years of Follow-Up.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ong Kevin L, Richards Jarod A, Lau Edmund C, Malkani Arthur L
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: We compared the revision risk between metal-on-polyethylene (MOP) and ceramic-on-polyethylene (COP) total hip arthroplasty patients and evaluated temporal changes in short-term revision risks for MOP patients.
METHODS: Primary MOP (n = 9480) and COP (n = 3620) total hip arthroplasties were evaluated from the Medicare data set (October 2005 to December 2015) for revision risk, with up to 10 years of follow-up using multivariate analysis. Temporal change in the short-term revision risk for MOP was evaluated (log-rank and Wilcoxon tests).
RESULTS: Revision incidence was 3.8% for COP and 4.3% for MOP. MOP short-term revision risk did not change over time (P ≥ .844 at 1 year and .627 at 2 years). Dislocation was the most common reason for revision (MOP: 23.5%; COP: 24.8%). Overall adjusted revision risks were not different between MOP and COP up to 10 years of follow-up (P ≥ .181).
CONCLUSIONS: Concerns with corrosion for metal heads do not appear to result in significantly elevated revision risk for MOP at up to 10 years. Corrosion does not appear as a primary reason for revision compared to other mechanisms.
METHODS: Primary MOP (n = 9480) and COP (n = 3620) total hip arthroplasties were evaluated from the Medicare data set (October 2005 to December 2015) for revision risk, with up to 10 years of follow-up using multivariate analysis. Temporal change in the short-term revision risk for MOP was evaluated (log-rank and Wilcoxon tests).
RESULTS: Revision incidence was 3.8% for COP and 4.3% for MOP. MOP short-term revision risk did not change over time (P ≥ .844 at 1 year and .627 at 2 years). Dislocation was the most common reason for revision (MOP: 23.5%; COP: 24.8%). Overall adjusted revision risks were not different between MOP and COP up to 10 years of follow-up (P ≥ .181).
CONCLUSIONS: Concerns with corrosion for metal heads do not appear to result in significantly elevated revision risk for MOP at up to 10 years. Corrosion does not appear as a primary reason for revision compared to other mechanisms.