普通假体直接前入路全髋关节置换的早期疗效

目的探讨普通假体直接前入路(DAA)全髋关节置换(THA)治疗髋关节疾病的可行性及早期疗效。方法对58例行普通假体THA的患者(72髋)分别采用DAA(DAA组,35髋)与后外侧入路(PLA组,37髋)。对比分析两组手术时间、切口长度、失血量、并发症、术后影像学参数、术后疼痛VAS评分及HHS评分等指标。结果 57例患者(71髋)获得随访,时间3～12个月,PLA组失访1例(1髋)。DAA组手术时间长于PLA组,而失血量、臼杯前倾角及外展角少(优)于PLA组,差异均有统计学意义(P 0. 05)。两组切口长度、并发症、股骨柄位置比较差异无统计学意义(P 0. 05)。术后1周VAS评分及术后1周、1个月、3个月HHS评分DAA组优于PLA组,差异均有统计学意义(P 0. 05)。结论普通假体DAA THA具有创伤小、康复快、假体位置佳和关节稳定性高等优点,早期疗效满意。     

前路经皮辅助关节囊上方入路全髋关节置换术应用探讨

目的 探讨前路经皮辅助关节囊上方入路（Anterior SuperPATH）全髋关节置换术（THA）的手术技术和早期疗效。方法 回顾性分析2019年11月至2020年10月在我院行THA的48例病人的临床资料,根据手术入路不同分为两组,23例采用前路经皮辅助关节囊上方入路者纳入Anterior SuperPATH组,25例采用经皮辅助通道上方关节囊入路者纳入SuperPATH组,记录并比较两组围手术期相关指标、髋臼杯位置、术后24 h疼痛视觉模拟量表（visual analogue scale,VAS）评分、术后6个月Harris评分、并发症发生情况。结果 病人随访6～25个月,平均为12.3个月。两组手术时间、术中出血量、下床活动时间、术后24 h VAS评分、髋臼假体外展角、术后6个月Harris评分的差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。Anterior SuperPATH组髋臼前倾角位置比SuperPATH组更佳,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。Anterior SuperPATH组大腿外侧麻木1例,SuperPATH组脱位1例、股骨大转子骨折2例。结论 与Super...     

体位对直接前方入路全髋关节置换术的影响

目的：探讨术中不同体位对直接前方入路（direct anterior approach,DAA）全髋关节置换术的影响。方法：回顾性分析2016年7月至2020年6月行DAA全髋关节置换术患者94例,根据术中不同体位分为2组,其中侧卧位45例,仰卧位（支架辅助下）49例。观察比较两组患者性别、患肢、身体质量指数（body mass index,BMI）等一般资料,切口长度、手术时间、术中出血量、术后24 h引流量、手术前后血红蛋白差值、术后首次下地时间、术后住院时间、术后并发症,术后1 d,1、2周,1、3、6个月的疼痛视觉模拟评分（visual analogue scale,VAS）,术后1、2周及1、3、6个月的Harris评分。结果：两组患者术后均获得随访,时间6~12（8.31±2.22）个月。两组患者的性别、手术部位、年龄、BMI、术前VAS、术前Harris评分比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。仰卧位（支架辅助下）组患者切口长度、手术时间、术中出血量、术后24 h引流量、手术前后血红蛋白差值、术后首次下地时间和术后住院时间均优于侧卧位组（P<0.05）;术中、术后输血例数比较,差异无统计学意义（P=0.550）。仰卧位（支架辅助下）组术中和术后前倾角、外展角比较,差异无统计学意义（P=0.825,P=0.066）;侧卧位组术中和术后前倾角、外展角比较,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。仰卧位（支架辅助下）组患者术后1 d,1、2周,1个月VAS低于侧卧位组（P<0.05）,两组术后3、6个月VAS差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。仰卧位（支架辅助下）组患者术后1周及1、3个月的Harris评分高于侧卧位组（P<0.05）,两组术后6个月的Harris评分比较,差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论：仰卧位（支架辅助下） DAA全髋关节置换术与侧卧位术式相比,手术切口小、手术时间短、出血少、下地时间早、住院时间短,且术中髋臼杯位置判断误差小,具有术后恢复快的优势,但在6个月后患者的髋关节功能恢复是相同的。     

后方关节囊修补预防全髋关节置换术后早期脱位

[目的]探讨加强修补后方软组织预防行后外侧切口首次人工全髋关节置换术后早期脱位的临床疗效和机理。[方法]回顾分析212例首次THA术中缝合后方关节囊与外旋短肌至臀中肌腱性部分的病例术中假体旋转活动度及术后早期脱位率，并与前期行关节囊完全切除的486例作对照分析。[结果]随访6个月～5a（平均3．7a），修补关节囊组仅2髋（0．9％）发生术后早期脱位；对照组发生脱位27髋（5．6％）。两组差异有显著意义（x^2=8．51，P〈0．005）。术中观察显示修补关节囊能够限制髋关节过度内旋20％～50％，阻止股骨头假体在髋臼内衬内的初始滑动。[结论]在假体安放正确基础上，加强修补后方关节囊能够有效预防行后外侧切口首次THA术后早期脱位，机理为关节囊修补后能限制髋关节过度内旋、阻止股骨头假体在髋臼内衬内的初始滑动，并提供了形成致密的假关节囊的生物学基础。     

不同髋臼杯前倾位置和球头假体大小对全髋关节置换术后后方稳定性的影响

目的探讨髋臼杯的前倾位置与球头大小对全髋关节置换（THA）术后后方稳定性的影响。方法利用计算机导航技术在假骨上模拟THA术后,不同髋臼杯前倾位置和不同球头大小在屈髋90°、内收0°和内收30°时髋关节内旋到引起脱位的角度进行测量和比较发生后脱位时的角度差异。结果在髋臼杯外展45°、前倾0°、5°、10°、15°时,28mm和36mm球头在屈髋90°内收0°和30°睛况下内旋至脱位的角度有明显差别（均为P〈0．05）,36mm球头可有更大的内旋角度,稳定性优于28mm球头。但当髋臼杯前倾20°时28mm与36mm球头内旋至脱位的角度间的差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）,内收30°时比内收0°时髋关节内旋至脱位的角度减小。关节稳定性随髋臼杯前倾减小而下降。髋臼杯前倾0°和髋关节内收30°时,28mm球头在外旋位时就可发生脱位。结论髋臼杯前倾角度增加可增加THA术后关节的稳定性,大球头的稳定性优于小球头,前倾达到某一角度时,大球头和小球头间的后方稳定性无差别。     

保留关节囊的后侧入路人工全髋关节置换术

目的探讨保留关节囊的后侧入路人工全髋置换术(total hip arthroplasty,THA)临床意义和手术方法。方法对2006年1~12月的29例股骨颈骨折患者(保留组),行后路THA,术中行关节囊保留修复,并与2005年全年施行的32例行后路常规关节囊切除的THA病人(常规组)在手术时间、术中出血量以及术后脱位发生率进行回顾性比较。结果保留组平均手术时间和术中出血量分别为(96±14)min和(240±50)ml,少于常规组的(132±16)min,(410±100)ml(P<0.05)。保留组术后未发生脱位,常规组术后2例发生脱位。结论THA术中保留修复关节囊,可以减少手术时间和术中出血,不增加手术风险,可以重建髋关节后侧软组织平衡,对预防术后髋关节脱位的发生有一定临床意义。     

关节囊修补对老年初次全髋关节置换术后早期脱位的影响

目的探讨后路老年初次全髋关节置换术中关节囊修补及其对术后早期脱位的影响。方法分析1996年11月至2007年5月行K—L入路治疗老年初次全髋关节置换的股骨颈骨折患者120例,均为单髋病例。根据术中是否进行关节囊的修补及外旋肌群的修复分为两组：A组术中切除后关节囊,行外旋肌群的修补;B组术中“T”形切开关节囊进行修补,并将关节囊与外旋肌群共同缝合于大转子及臀中肌止点。结果A组80例,16例失随访,术后早期脱位2例2髋（2．5％）。B组40例,1例失随访,无一例出现术后早期脱位。结论后路关节囊及软组织袖修补方法简单,不增加手术创伤,可以有效发挥阻挡作用,降低术后早期脱位率。     

骨盆旋转对全髋关节置换术中髋臼假体安放角度的影响

目的：研究骨盆沿人体三维方向旋转对全髋关节置换术中髋臼假体实际安放角度的影响规律。方法：采集正常成人的骨盆CT影像学资料,采用电脑软件三维重建骨盆髋臼并模拟骨盆分别围绕与人体矢状面、横断面和冠状面垂直的X轴、Y轴和Z轴旋转时,以标准角度植入髋臼假体时测量臼杯的放射外展角（radiographic inclination,RI）和放射前倾角（radiographic anteversion,RA）。采用相关性分析量化各个轴向旋转角度与髋臼实际角度的关系。结果：骨盆沿X轴及Y轴旋转时对髋臼的RA影响较小,但对RI影响较大并呈线性相关,回归方程分别为RA=0.682 4X+10.256（r²=0.308 4）和RA=-0.714 1Y+10.424（r²=0.999 8）;骨盆沿Z轴旋转时对RA几乎无影响,但与RI呈线性相关,回归方程为RI=1.0Z+46（r²=1.0）。结论：骨盆的前后旋转或沿躯体的纵轴旋转均明显影响髋臼的前倾角,但对外展角影响较小;相反,骨盆在冠状面上的左右歪斜可明显影响髋臼的外展角,但不影响其前倾角。     

后外侧入路与直接前方入路行单侧全髋关节置换的早期疗效比较

目的 探讨后外侧入路(postero lateral approach,PLA)和直接前方入路(direct anterior ap?proach,DAA)行全髋关节置换术(total hip arthroplasty,THA)的早期疗效及并发症发生情况.方法 回顾性分析2018年6月至2019年6月于绵阳市中心医院行...     

不同手术入路髋臼假体放置角度差异对疗效的影响

目的 探讨前外侧入路和后外侧入路行全髋关节置换术时髋臼假体放置角度差异对疗效的影响.方法 对2006年1月至2011年12月67例行初次单侧全髋关节置换术患者的临床资料进行回顾性研究,根据手术入路不同分为前外侧入路组(31例)和后外侧入路组(36例),两组患者术前一般资料比较差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05),具有可比性.术中测量髋臼假体安放时的前倾角、外展角,比较两组患者术中髋关节中立位的最大髋关节屈曲角和后伸角,以及术后髋关节Harris评分和脱位发生率.结果 前外侧入路组术中髋臼假体放置的前倾角为8°～ 20°,外展角为30°～40°;后外侧入路组中髋臼假体放置的前倾角为15°～30°,外展角为35°～45°.两组患者的髋关节平均最大屈曲角(110°±11°比100°±10°)和最大后伸角(15°±4°比25°±6°)差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05).所有患者术后获12～18个月(平均15.6个月)随访,两组患者的术后Harris评分[(89±11)分比(88±12)分]和髋关节脱位发生率[3.2％(1/31)比5.5％(2/36)]差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05). 结论 不同手术入路行全髋关节置换术时对髋臼假体前倾角的放置有不同要求,前外侧入路中髋臼假体的前倾角应当比后外侧入路中髋臼假体的前倾角小;髋臼假体放置角度差异对疗效无显著影响.     

Acetabular and Femoral Component Positioning Using Direct Anterior Approach Versus Posterior Approach in Total Hip Arthroplasty

PurposeDirect anterior approach (DAA) has recently become popular in total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, irrespective of the surgical approach used, component malposition is an important factor affecting function and complications after THA. This study aims to compare component positioning on the femoral and acetabular side between DAA and posterior approach (PA) to the hip joint. We hypothesized that the two approaches are similar in terms of component positioning.MethodsWe prospectively studied 50 patients, matched according to age, sex, and body mass index, undergoing THA, divided non-randomly into 2 groups. Group 1 comprised 25 patients (35 hips) undergoing THA using DAA and group 2 comprised 25 patients (25 hips) undergoing THA using PA. Ten patients from group 1 had simultaneous bilateral THA. Radiological parameters studied were acetabular inclination (AI), coronal femoral stem alignment (CFA), leg length difference (LLD), acetabular cup version (AV), and femoral stem version (FV).ResultsThere was no significant difference in AI, CFA, LLD, AV, and FV between the two groups. Excellent to good inter and intra-observer reliability expressed in terms of intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was noted for all the radiographic measurements.ConclusionBoth DAA and PA for THA achieve comparable radiological component positioning. DAA may not provide any advantage over PA in terms of positioning of the prosthesis.Level of EvidenceLevel II, non-randomized comparative study.     

侧卧位下髋关节直接前入路全髋关节置换术后短期疗效观察

目的探讨侧卧位下髋关节前方直接经肌间隙入路全髋关节置换术的短期疗效。方法2016年3月~2018年10月,共216例因髋关节疾病入住我科初次行单侧全髋关节置换术,根据病例选择及排除标准,纳入183例,其中髋关节直接前入路(direct anterior approach,DAA)92例(DAA组),髋关节后外侧入路(posterolateral approach,PLA)91例(PLA组),比较2组手术时间、术中出血量、手术切口长度、术后住院时间、手术并发症,临床疗效通过Harris髋关节功能评分(Harris Hip Score,HHS)、疼痛视觉模拟评分(Visual Analogue Score,VAS)评估,通过髋关节正位片对术后假体的位置进行评价。结果DAA组和PLA组手术时间分别为(101.0±15.6)、(98.6±11.6)min,2组间无统计学差异(t=1.198,P=0.233);手术切口长度分别为(12.2±2.1)、(12.6±2.1)cm,差异无显著性(t=-1.441,P=0.151)。DAA组术中出血量(218.5±20.1)ml,明显少于PLA组(250.0±16.7)ml(t=-11.516,P=0.000);术后住院时间(10.2±3.1)d,明显短于PLA组(13.8±2.6)d(t=-8.629,P=0.000);术后输血率3.3%(3/92),显著低于PLA组12.1%(11/91)(χ2=3.873,P=0.049);并发症发生率明显低于PLA组[8.4%(8/92)vs.18.7%(17/91),χ2=19.309,P=0.002]。DAA组切口周围感染发生率明显低于PLA组[2.1%(2/92)vs 9.9%(9/91),χ2=4.821,P=0.028];术后关节脱位发生率0%(0/92),显著低于PLA组5.5%(5/91)(Fisher精确检验,P=0.029);2组股外侧皮神经损伤发生率分别为4.3%(4/92)、0%,差异无显著性(Fisher精确检验,P=0.121)。PLA组1例出现假体周围感染,经足量抗生素治疗无效后,给予翻修手术。随访6~21个月,平均13.6月。HHS评分术后1、3、6个月和末次随访与术前比较差异均有显著性(P<0.05)。疼痛VAS评分术后3、6个月和末次随访与术前比较差异有显著性(P<0.05)。术后X线评估2组患者术后假体的位置均处于安全范围内,差异无统计学意义(外展角:42.7°±3.3°vs.42.0°±3.8°,t=1.391,P=0.166;前倾角:19.5°±1.3°vs.19.4°±2.1°,t=0.129,P=0.897)。结论侧卧位下DAA全髋关节置换术的早期临床疗效良好,具有创伤小、出血少、住院时间短等优点,是一种安全有效的微创手术入路。     

The Direct Anterior Approach is Associated With Early Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background

The direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty (THA) has generated increased interest recently. The purpose of this study was to compare the duration to failure and reasons for revision of primary THA performed elsewhere and subsequently revised at our institution after the direct anterior vs other nonanterior surgical approaches to the hip.

微创直接前入路与后外侧入路全髋关节置换术早期疗效的比较

目的探讨微创直接前入路(direct anterior approach,DAA)全髋关节置换术治疗老年股骨颈骨折的价值。方法回顾性比较2016年9月~2017年12月微创DAA人工全髋关节置换术(DAA组)与后外侧入路同时重建外旋肌群(对照组)治疗股骨颈骨折的疗效,观察指标包括手术时间、手术切口长度、术中出血量、术后引流量、下地时间、髋臼外展角、柄假体颈干角、髋臼前倾角、髋臼假体直径、术后72 h疼痛视觉模拟评分(Visual Analogue Score,VAS)以及术后1、6个月Harris髋关节评分(Harris Hip Score,HSS)。结果DDA组手术切口长度(9.5±1.2)mm,明显短于对照组(15.1±1.1)mm(t=-21.920,P=0.00);术后引流量(263.7±115.1)ml,明显少于对照组(428.0±165.8)ml(t=-4.996,P=0.00);术后下地时间(1.9±0.9)d,明显短于对照组(4.6±0.6)d(t=-16.769,P=0.00);术后72 h内VAS评分(2.3±0.5)分,明显小于对照组评分(2.6±0.5)分(t=-2.552,P=0.013);术后1个月HHS评分(75.7±5.9)分,明显高于对照组(70.2±7.1)分(t=3.703,P=0.000);术后6个月2组HHS评分分别为(94.4±2.1)、(93.4±2.3)分,差异无统计学意义(t=1.947,P=0.055)。DAA组1例发生无移位大转子骨折,2个月后恢复,对照组发生1例脱位,并发症发生率分别为2.9%(1/35)、2.2%(1/45),差异无统计学意义(Fisher精确检验,P=1.000)。结论DAA全髋关节置换术治疗股骨颈骨折,手术切口较小,术后疼痛轻,术后首次下地时间早,早期髋关节功能好,早期的临床疗效好。     

Variability in Acetabular Component Position in Patients Undergoing Direct Anterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty Who Have Concomitant Spine Pathology

BackgroundHip instability following total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be a major cause of revision surgery. Physiological patient position impacts acetabular anteversion and abduction, and influences the functional component positioning. Osteoarthritis of the spine leads to abnormal spinopelvic biomechanics and motion, but there is no consensus on the degree of component variability for THAs performed by anterior approach. Therefore, we sought to present guidelines for changes in acetabular component positioning between supine and standing positions for patients undergoing primary THA by a uniform anterior approach.MethodsPerioperative patient radiographs of the pelvis and lumbar spine were collected. Images were used to determine acetabular component positioning and degree of coexisting spinal pathology, categorized as a Lane Grade (LG). Final analysis of variance was performed on a sample size of 643 anterior primary THAs.ResultsFrom supine to standing position, as the severity of lumbar pathology increased the change in anteversion also increased (LG:0 = ?0.11° ± 4.65°, LG:1 = 2.02° ± 4.09°, LG:2-3 = 5.78° ± 5.72°, P < .001). The mean supine anteversion in patients with absent lumbar pathology was 19.72° ± 5.05° and was lower in patients with worsening lumbar pathology (LG:1 = 18.25° ± 4.81°, LG:2-3 = 16.73° ± 5.28°, P < .001).ConclusionPatients undergoing primary THA by anterior approach with worsening spinal pathology have larger increases in component anteversion when transitioning from supine to standing positions. Consideration should be given to this expected variability when placing the patient’s acetabular component.     

The Functional Mechanics of the Acetabular Component in Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundTotal hip arthroplasty functional safe zones match postural hip changes to dynamic positioning of the acetabular component. We studied integrating the Anteinclination (AI) cup angle into the spinopelvic environment, defining normative values for all parameters and calculating adjustments to AI for each degree of altered standing pelvic position and postural mobility from these values. A sagittal geometric model was employed to determine these values using established spinopelvic parameter angles.MethodsTheoretical normative Pelvic Incidence (PI) specific values were calculated using a triangular construct employing a linear equation describing the functional relationship between the pelvic parameters at a mobility producing an isosceles solution for normative acetabular angles. Individual optimal AI cup values for altered Sacral Slope (SS)/pelvic tilt (sPT) and mobility (dSS) were calculated using specific ratios of angular change between parameters correcting from these normative values.ResultsA PI:SS:sPT ratio of angular change of 3:2:1 at dSS = 25° mobility creates an isosceles condition solving for PI specific theoretical normative values for all construct parameters. Individualized tilt correction applies to each posture a +0.25° AI alteration for each +1° sPT increase from this architectural value. Mobility correction applies a +0.5° standing AI and ?0.5° sitting AI alteration for each ?1° dSS < 25°, the opposite for each +1° dSS > 25°. The Sacroacetabular angle/Pelvic acetabular angle (SAA/PAA) index describes the underlying spinopelvic environment the cup functions within.ConclusionThis model quantitatively integrates an implanted acetabular component into the host spinopelvic environment. Theoretical normative and individual optimal cup orientations are passively determined by these conditions of standing pelvic position and mobility.