Quality of Life in Patients Submitted to Arthroplasty Total Hip Resurfacing

Authors

  • Cleber Furlan
  • Luiz Carlos de Abreu Faculdade de Medicina do ABC. Departamento de Saúde da Coletividade. Disciplina de Metodologia Científica.
  • Rodrigo Luiz Vetorazzi
  • Takeshi Chikude
  • Dorian Riker T. Menezes
  • Roberto Yukio Ikemoto
  • Carlos Bandeira de Mello Monteiro
  • Edige Felipe de Souza Santos
  • Fernando Rocha Oliviera
  • Edison Noboru Fujiki

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3823/1742

Keywords:

Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip, Quality of life

Abstract

Background: Total hip arthroplasty involves replacing the hip joint with a prosthesis. This procedure aims to restore the function and relief in painful hip joint of patients with hip disorders who have failed in the nonoperative treatment (conservative). The surgery has dramatically improved the quality of life and independence of people who have disorders in the hip. With technological advances, new techniques and materials emerge and gradually improve the success of this intervention on quality of life of patients. Among the models used to perform total hip arthroplasty, one can cite the resurfacing method, suitable for young people and adults which uses a femoral head prosthesis on the surface for the preservation of the head and neck of the femur and a component of type acetabular prosthesis monoblock, similar to conventional total hip prosthesis Objective: To describe the quality of life and functionality of patients undergoing arthroplasty surgery Hip Resurfacing. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 30 patients hospitalized in the Hospital Estadual Mário Covas and undergoing surgery for total hip arthroplasty during the period 2008 to 2010. The patients were evaluated pre-surgery and at 12 and 48 months postoperatively by means of two questionnaires, the Harris Hip Score and SF-36. Results: The sample consisted of 30 individuals with an average age of 46.83. The findings were significant p <0.001 compared to pre Harris Hip Score (average 53.86 confidence interval 95% CI: 50.43 to 57.3) and postoperative (89.7 average confidence interval 95% , CI: 88.13 to 91.26), and found a higher score in the postoperative time. Moreover, a correlation between age and pain areas (r = -0.436 p <0.015) was observed and functional capacity (r = -0.46 p <0.009) SF36. Conclusion: In the short term, this overall assessment of patients manifested improvement in pain, function (gait and physical activity), mobility and initial deformity. Individuals also reported improved quality of life in the postoperative follow-up to arthroplasty hip resurfacing.

 

References

Murphy SB, Ecker TM, Tannast M. THA performed using conventional and navigated tissue preserving technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;(453):160-7

Najarian BC, Kilgore JE, Markel DC. Evaluation of componente positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty using an imageless navigation device compared with traditional methods. J Arthroplaasty. 2009;24(1):15-21.

Widmer KH. Containment versus impingement: finding a compromisse for cup placement in totl hip rthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2007;(1):S29-33.

Reininga IH, Zijlstra W, Wagenmakers R, Boerboom Al, Huijbers BP, Groothoff JW, Bulstra SK, Stevens M. Minumally invasive and computer-navigated total hip arthroplasty: a qualitative and systematic review of the literature. BMC Muscoloskelet Disord.2010;11:92-104.

Jones, Richard E; Huo, Michael H; Hashemi, Mohammad T Less. Current Orthopaedic Practice. 19(2):127-130, April 2008

Wera GD, Gillespie RJ, Petty C, Petersilge WJ, Kraay MJ, Goldberg VM. Revision of hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2010;39(8):E78–83.

Silva M, Lee KH, Heisel C, Dela Rosa MA, Schmalzried TP. The biomechanical results of total hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-A(1):40–6.

Naal FD, Maffiuletti NA, Munzinger U, Hersche O. Sports after hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Am J Sports Med. 2008. Editorial.

Amstutz HC, Takamura KM, Le Duff MJ. The effect of patient selection and surgical technique on the results of Conserve(R) Plus hip resurfacing–3.5- to 14-year follow-up. Orthop Clin North Am. Apr 2011;42(2):133-142, vii.

Sieber HP, Rieker CB, Köttig P. Analysis of 118 second-generation metal-onmetal retrieved hip implants. J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 1999;81(1):46-50.

Treacy RB, McBryde CW, Pynsent PB. Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a minimum follow-up of five-years. J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 2005;87(2):167-70.

Willert H-G, Buchhorn GH, Fayyazi A, Flury R, Windler M, Köster G, et al. Metal-on-metal bearings and hypersensitivity in patients with artificial hip joints. A clinical and histomorphological study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(1):28–36.

Wang JW, Lin CC. Pelvic mass caused by polyethylene wear after uncemented total hip arthroplasty. The Journal of arthroplasty. 1996. p.626–8.

Schmalzried TP. Metal-metal bearing surfaces in hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2009;32(9).

Mont MA, Schmalzried TP. Modern metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: important observations from the first ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008;90(Suppl 3):3.

Loughead JM, Manning W, Holland JP. Outcome of hip resurfacing in obese patients. Acta Orthop Belg. 2011;77(1):47–52.

Shimmin AJ, Walter WL, Esposito C. The influence of the size of the component on the outcome of resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: a review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92(4):469–76.

Ciconelli RM, Ferraz MB, Santos W, Meinão I, Quaresma MR. Tradução para a língua portuguesa e validação do questionário genérico de avaliação de qualidade de vida SF-36 (Brasil SF-36). Rev Bras Reumatol. 1999;39(3):143-50.

Guimarães R.P, Alves D.P, Silva G.B, Bittar S.T, Ono N.K, Honda E, et al. Tradução e adaptação transcultural do instrumento de avaliação do quadril Harris Hip Score Acta Ortop Bras, 18 (3) (2010), pp. 142–147

Ethgen O, Bruyère O, Richy F, Dardennes C, Reginster JY. Health-related quality of life in total hip and total knee arthroplasty: a qualitative and systematic review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86(5):963–74.

Busija L, Osborne RH, Nilsdotter A, Buchbinder R, Roos EM. Magnitude and meaningfulness of change in SF-36 scores in four types of orthopedic surgery. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008;6:55.

Alberta Hip Improvement Project; MacKenzie JR, O’Connor GJ et al (2012) Functional outcomes for 2 years comparing hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 27(5):750–7.e2

Issa K, Palich A, Tatevossian T, Kapadia BH, Naziri Q, Mont M a. The outcomes of hip resurfacing compared to standard primary total hip arthroplasty in Men. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013 Jan;14:161.

Vail, T.P., Mina, C.A., Yergler, J.D., and Pietrobon, R. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing compares favorably with THA at 2 years followup. Clin Orthop. 2006; 453: 123–131

Howie DW, McGee MA, Costi K, Graves SE. Metal-on-metal resurfacing versus total hip replacement-the value of a randomized clinical trial. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005 Apr;36(2):195-201

Lavigne M, Masse V, Girard J, Roy AG, Vendittoli PA. Return to sport after hipresurfacing or total hip arthroplasty: a randomized study. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice

Girard J, Vendittoli PA, Roy AG, Lavigne M. [Femoral offset restauration and clinical function after total hip arthroplasty and surface replacement of the hip: a randomized study]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 2008 jun;94(4):376-81. Epub 2008 Feb 20.

Naal FD, Maffiuletti NA, Munzinger U, Hersche O. After hip resurfacing arthroplasty.Am J Sports Med. 2007;35:705-11.

Daniel J, Pynsent PB, McMinn DJ. Metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip in

patients under the age of 55 years with osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br.

;86(2):177-84.

Jameson SS, Langton DJ, Natu S, Nargol TV. The Influence of Age and Sex on Early Clinical Results After Hip Resurfacing An Independent Center Analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2008 Sep; 23(6Suppl 1):50-5.

McBryde CW, Theivendran K, Thomas AMC, Treacy RBC, Pynsent PB. The influence of head size and sex on the outcome of Birmingham hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Am [Internet]. 2010 Jan;92(1):105–12.

Hing CB, Back DL, Shimmin AJ. Hip resurfacing: indications, results, and conclusions. Instr Course Lect. 2007;56:171-8.

Seyler TM, Marker DR, Boyd HS, Zywiel MG, McGrath MS, Mont MA. Preoperative evaluation to determine candidates for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(Suppl 6):32-41

Amstutz HC, Wisk LE, Le Duff MJ. Sex as a patient selection criterion for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26(2):198-208.

De Smet KA, Van Der Straeten C, Van Orsouw M, Doubi R, Backers K, Grammatopoulos G. Revisions of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: lessons learned and improved outcome. Orthop Clin North Am. 2011;42(2):259–269

Downloads

Additional Files

Published

2015-06-30

Issue

Vol. 8 (2015)

Section

Traumatology and Orthopedics

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access and Benefits of Publishing Open Access).

 

 

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 1 2 3 4 > >>