Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery · 2010
Survivorship of the humeral component in shoulder arthroplasty.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Cil Akin, Veillette Christian J H, Sanchez-Sotelo Joaquin, Sperling John W, Schleck Cathy D, Cofield Robert H
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Loosening of the humeral component is rarely a cause for revision. This study was conducted to determine long-term survivorship of humeral components and investigate the risk factors associated with humeral component removal or revision.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1984 to 2004, 1423 patients underwent 1584 primary Neer and Cofield shoulder arthroplasties. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate implant survival. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the effects of age, gender, etiology of the disease, surgery type (hemi vs total), fixation (cemented vs noncemented), and the humeral component design (Neer II, Cofield 1 or 2) with survival free of revision or removal of the humeral component.
RESULTS: There were 108 revisions and 17 removals of the humeral component. Estimates of survivorship free of revision or removal of the humeral component for any reason was 94.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93.6-96.0) at 5 years, 92.0% (95% CI, 90.4-93.6) at 10 years, 86.7% (95% CI, 84.2-89.4) at 15 years, and 82.8% (95% CI, 78.5-87.5) at 20 years. Younger age, male gender, replacement due to posttraumatic arthritis, an uncemented component, and use of a metal-backed glenoid component increased the likelihood of humeral component failure.
CONCLUSIONS: The need for revision of the humeral component is commonly related to glenoid or glenoid component issues. Patient and diagnostic factors play a role in implant survival; implant type and method of fixation are less important.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4; Case series, treatment study.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1984 to 2004, 1423 patients underwent 1584 primary Neer and Cofield shoulder arthroplasties. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate implant survival. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the effects of age, gender, etiology of the disease, surgery type (hemi vs total), fixation (cemented vs noncemented), and the humeral component design (Neer II, Cofield 1 or 2) with survival free of revision or removal of the humeral component.
RESULTS: There were 108 revisions and 17 removals of the humeral component. Estimates of survivorship free of revision or removal of the humeral component for any reason was 94.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93.6-96.0) at 5 years, 92.0% (95% CI, 90.4-93.6) at 10 years, 86.7% (95% CI, 84.2-89.4) at 15 years, and 82.8% (95% CI, 78.5-87.5) at 20 years. Younger age, male gender, replacement due to posttraumatic arthritis, an uncemented component, and use of a metal-backed glenoid component increased the likelihood of humeral component failure.
CONCLUSIONS: The need for revision of the humeral component is commonly related to glenoid or glenoid component issues. Patient and diagnostic factors play a role in implant survival; implant type and method of fixation are less important.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4; Case series, treatment study.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdolescentAdultAge FactorsAgedAged, 80 and overArthroplasty, ReplacementCementationCohort StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansHumerusJoint ProsthesisKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsProportional Hazards ModelsProsthesis DesignProsthesis FailureRadiographyRange of Motion, ArticularReoperationRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentSex FactorsShoulder JointTime FactorsYoung Adult