IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i8p4670-d792593.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Short-Term Functional Outcomes of Short Femoral Neck Stems Are the Same as Those of Conventional Stems in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

Author

Listed:
  • Rafał Tkacz

    (Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, 109 Military Hospital, 71-442 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Dariusz Larysz

    (Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, 109 Military Hospital, 71-442 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Rafał Przybylski

    (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Independent Public Health Care Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration, 70-382 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Marta Tkacz

    (Department of Physiology, Pomeranian Medical University, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Krzysztof Safranow

    (Department of Biochemistry and Medical Chemistry, Pomeranian Medical University, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Maciej Tarnowski

    (Department of Physiology, Pomeranian Medical University, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland)

Abstract

(1) Background: In this study, two types of implants were compared—a conventional hip stem and a femoral neck prosthesis. (2) Methods: The femoral neck prosthesis study group included 21 patients, while the conventional hip stem control group was 40 patients. The first examination was the pre-op check, while the next ones were performed 6 weeks, 1 year, and 3 years after surgery. The Harris Hip Score (HHS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Oxford Hip Score (OHS), University of California at Los Angeles Activity Score (UCLA), and Visual Analog Scale EQ (VAS EQ) forms were completed at each clinical study visit. (3) Results: The HHS in the femoral neck prosthesis group and the conventional hip stem group 6 weeks after surgery was 68.8 ± 16.47 and 67.6 ± 8.92, respectively, and 1 year after surgery, this was 93 ± 5.58 vs. 90.6 ± 5.17, respectively. The OHS of the femoral neck prosthesis group was 34.8 points after 6 weeks, 45.5 points after 1 year, and 43.9 points after 3 years. The respective values in the conventional hip stem group were 35.5, 41.55, and 42.13 points. The WOMAC values for the femoral neck prosthesis group were 70.6, 92.7, and 86 points, respectively, while for the conventional hip stem group, they were 74, 88.1, and 86.1 points. The UCLA scores recorded in the conventional hip stem group ranged from 3.15 to 5.05 points, but a higher mean value of 5.33 points was obtained in the femoral neck prosthesis group. VAS EQ was equal to 84 points three years after the operation. (4) Conclusions: The study showed no significant differences in the functional scores of both groups, and the new type of cervical femoral stem could be the first choice in younger patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Rafał Tkacz & Dariusz Larysz & Rafał Przybylski & Marta Tkacz & Krzysztof Safranow & Maciej Tarnowski, 2022. "Short-Term Functional Outcomes of Short Femoral Neck Stems Are the Same as Those of Conventional Stems in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-12, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:8:p:4670-:d:792593
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/8/4670/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/8/4670/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:8:p:4670-:d:792593. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.