• Simon S Jameson, Deborah Lees, Philip James, Andrew Johnson, Christopher Nachtsheim, James L McVie, Amar Rangan, Scott D Muller, and Mike R Reed.
• National Orthopaedic Research and Surgical Outcomes Collaboration, UK; Northern Deanery Trauma & Orthopaedic Training Scheme, Waterfront 4, Goldcrest Way, Newcastle NE15 8NY, UK. Electronic address: simonjameson@doctors.org.uk.
• Injury. 2013 Dec 1;44(12):1940-4.

BackgroundThe treatment of choice for intracapsular neck of femur (NOF) fractures in younger, more active patients remains unknown. Some surgeons advocate total hip replacement (THR).AimThis study aimed to compare complications following THR and hemiarthroplasty using the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) database in England.MethodDislocation and revision rates were extracted for all patients with NOF fracture who underwent either cemented hemiarthroplasty or cemented THR between January 2005 and December 2008. To make a 'like for like' comparison all 3866 THR patients were matched to 3866 hemiarthroplasty patients (from a total of 41,343) in terms of age, sex and Charlson score.Results And ConclusionEighteen-month dislocation was significantly higher in the THR group (2.4% vs. 0.5%, odds ratio (OR) 3.90 (2.99-5.05), p<0.001). This difference was sustained at the 4-year stage (2.9% vs. 0.9%, OR 3.18 (1.58-6.94), p=0.001) in a subset of patients with longer follow-up. There was no significant difference in revision rate up to 4 years (1.8% vs. 2.1%, OR 0.85 (0.46-1.55), p=0.666). In this national analysis of matched patients short- and medium-term dislocation rates following THR were significantly higher than following cemented hemiarthroplasty, without any difference in revision rates at 4 years. The low risk of dislocation may be acceptable in order to experience the apparent functional benefits of THR.Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

29 keywords...

hide…