Effectiveness of combined anteversion angle technique in total hip arthroplasty for treatment of ankylosing spondylitis affecting hip joint.
10.7507/1002-1892.202310087
- Author:
Yuan WANG
1
;
Fang PEI
1
;
Feng WAN
2
;
Zexuan WANG
1
;
Xiaolei LIU
3
;
Kaijin GUO
1
Author Information
1. Department of Joint Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou Jiangsu, 221000, P. R. China.
2. Department of Sports Medicine, Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou Jiangsu, 221000, P. R. China.
3. Department of Spine Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou Jiangsu, 221000, P. R. China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Combined anteversion angle technique;
ankylosing spondylitis;
total hip arthroplasty
- MeSH:
Humans;
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip/methods*;
Hip Dislocation/surgery*;
Spondylitis, Ankylosing/surgery*;
Retrospective Studies;
Quality of Life;
Treatment Outcome;
Hip Joint/surgery*;
Hip Prosthesis
- From:
Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery
2024;38(1):15-21
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To explore the effectiveness of the combined anteversion angle technique in total hip arthroplasty (THA) for treating ankylosing spondylitis (AS) affecting the hip joint.
METHODS:A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 73 patients with AS affecting the hip joint who underwent THA between August 2018 and August 2021. According to whether the combined anteversion angle technique was used in THA, the patients were divided into study group (37 cases, combined anteversion angle technique was used in THA) and control group (36 cases, traditional THA). There was no significant difference in baseline data such as gender, age, body mass index, disease duration, preoperative Harris score, range of motion (ROM), acetabular anteversion angle, acetabular abduction angle, femoral anteversion angle, and combined anteversion angle between the two groups ( P>0.05). The operation time, hospital stay, and complications of the two groups were recorded and compared. The Harris score and hip ROM were compared between the two groups before operation, at 1, 3, 6, 12 months after operation, and at last follow-up. The acetabular component anteversion angle, femoral component anteversion angle, acetabular component abduction angle, and component combined anteversion angle were measured postoperatively.
RESULTS:The operation time in the study group was significantly shorter than that in the control group ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in hospital stay between the two groups ( P>0.05). There was no intraoperative complication such as acetabular and proximal femoral fractures, neurovascular injuries in both groups, and the incisions healed by first intention. All patients were followed up 2-3 years, with an average of 2.4 years; there was no significant difference in the follow-up time between the two groups ( P>0.05). During the follow-up period, there was no complication such as hip dislocation, wound infection, delayed wound healing, deep venous thrombosis, and hip dislocation in both groups. The hip Harris score and ROM of the two groups gradually increased with time after operation, and the differences were significant when compared with those before operation ( P<0.05); the above two indicators of the study group were significantly better than those of the control group at each time point after operation ( P<0.05). Extensive bone ingrowth on the surface of the components could be observed in the anteroposterior X-ray films of the hip joint of the two groups at 12 months after operation, and the acetabular components was stable without femoral stem subsidence, osteolysis around the components, and heterotopic ossification. At last follow-up, the acetabular component anteversion angle, femoral component anteversion angle, and component combined anteversion angle in the study group were significantly superior to those in the control group ( P<0.05), except that there was no significant difference in the acetabular component abduction angle between the two groups ( P>0.05).
CONCLUSION:For patients with AS affecting the hip joint, the use of the combined anteversion angle technique during THA effectively promotes the recovery of hip joint function and enhances the postoperative quality of life of patients when compared to traditional THA.
