Systematic evaluation of the efficacy and safety of collum femoris preserving prosthesis in total hip arthroplasty
10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2456
- Author:
Hetao HUANG
1
Author Information
1. The Second Clinical Medical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Collum femoris preserving prosthesis;
Pain;
Prostheisis loosening;
Systematic evaluation;
Total hip arthroplasty
- From:
Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research
2020;24(6):962-967
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Total hip arthroplasty with femoral neck prosthesis is being accepted by more and more doctors, but the effect of femoral neck prosthesis preservation or not on total hip arthroplasty is still uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of collum femoris preserving prosthesis in total hip arthroplasty. METHODS: CBM, CNKI, VIP, WanFang, PubMed, Embase and The Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically. The deadline was March 1,2018. All clinical controlled trials collum femoris preserving prosthesis in total hip arthroplasty were collected and methodological quality was evaluated one by one. RevMan 4.2 software was used for systematic evaluation. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) Four studies were included, involoing 302 patients. Because there were few studies and patients involved, and the outcome evaluation indicators were quite different, meta-analysis cannot be conducted, only descriptive systematic evaluation was performed. (2) Three studies compared the efficacy of two surgical methods in improving Harris score. Two of them considered that total hip arthroplasty with collum femoris preserving prosthesis was significantly better than total hip arthroplasty with non-collum femoris preserving prosthesis (P < 0.05). The other one considered that there was no significant difference between two surgical methods in improving Harris score (P > 0.05). (3) Two studies compared the efficacy of two surgical methods in improving the range of motion of the joint. One study showed that total hip arthroplasty with collum femoris preserving prosthesis was significantly better than total hip arthroplasty with non-prosthesis (P < 0.05). The other showed that there was no significant difference between the two surgical methods in improving the range of motion of the joint (P > 0.05). (4) One study showed that bone loss around the prosthesis in the total hip arthroplasty group with prosthesis was significantly less than that in the total hip arthroplasty group without collum femoris preserving prosthesis at 1 year postoperatively (P < 0.05). (5) One study found that the collum femoris preserving prosthesis in total hip arthroplasty group was superior to the non-collum femoris preserving prosthesis in total hip arthroplasty group in improving the Visual Analogue Scale at 1 year postoperatively (P < 0.05). (6) Two studies showed that no adverse prosthetic events such as loosening or sinking occurred at 1 year after total hip arthroplasty. (7) Two studies compared the differences in operation time and intraoperative bleeding volume, which showed no significant difference between two groups (P > 0.05). (8) One study found that the total amount of bleeding in total hip arthroplasty group with collum femoris preserving prosthesis was higher than that in total hip arthroplasty group without collum femoris preserving prosthesis (P < 0.05). (9) In summary, total hip arthroplasty with collum femoris preserving prosthesis has advantages in improving Harris score, decreasing the Visual Analogue Scale score and that bone loss around the prosthesis. More rigorous research is needed to increase the intensity of evidence.
