Zusammenfassung
Studienziel: Vor dem Hintergrund anstehender Wechseloperationen stellt die Versorgung junger, aktiver Patienten mit einer Hüftendoprothese eine besondere Herausforderung dar. Trotz umfangreicher Materialentwicklungen und Verbesserungen der Operationstechniken ist die Standzeit der Prothesen bei diesen Patienten im Vergleich mit älteren Patienten deutlich verkürzt. Anhand klinisch-radiologischer Verlaufsparameter der Schenkelhalsprothese CUT (ESKA Orthodynamics Lübeck) soll die mittelfristige Eignung dieses metaphysär verankernden Implantats für den jüngeren Patienten kritisch evaluiert werden. Methode: 86 Patienten (99 Hüftgelenke) mit einem Durchschnittsalter von 50 Jahren, die im Zeitraum 2001 bis 2005 konsekutiv mit einer zementfreien Schenkelhalsendoprothese vom Typ ESKA CUT versorgt worden waren, wurden nach durchschnittlich 5,4 Jahren (1,7–6,5) mittels Harris Hip Score sowie nativradiologisch nachuntersucht. Beckenübersichtsaufnahmen sowie Lauenstein-Aufnahmen der operierten Hüften wurden mit den unmittelbar postoperativ angefertigten Röntgenbildern verglichen. Die radiologische Auswertung umfasste die subkapitale Resektion, die Implantatverankerung (Varus-/Valgusabweichung des empfohlenen Implantationswinkels von 145°), den medialen und lateralen Kortikaliskontakt, periartikuläre Ossifikationen sowie die knöcherne Integration der Komponenten. Ergebnisse: Die kumulative Überlebenswahrscheinlichkeit nach Kaplan-Meier betrug 98 % nach 6,6 Jahren. Der Harris Hip Score verbesserte sich von präoperativ 50 Punkte auf 98 Punkte. In 92 % der Fälle zeigte sich eine korrekte, mit maximalem Schenkelhalserhalt durchgeführte subkapitale Resektion. Eine korrekte Implantatpositionierung zeigte sich in 72 % der Fälle. Eine valgische Implantation war in 18 % und eine varische Positionierung in 10 % der Fälle zu beobachten. Die Pfannenkomponenten wiesen zu 100 % eine stabile, knöcherne Integration auf. 95 % der Prothesenschäfte zeigten ebenfalls eine stabile knöcherne Integration. Schlussfolgerungen: Die Ergebnisse dieser Studie zeigen, dass die Ansprüche an eine Schenkelhalsprothese zur Versorgung junger, aktiver Patienten sowohl mit Blick auf die klinisch-radiologischen Resultate als auch auf die Möglichkeit zur knochensparenden Implantation erfüllt werden und die CUT-Schenkelhalsprothese eine mögliche Alternative darstellt.
Abstract
Aim: With regard to total replacement of the hip, revision arthroplasty poses a challenge especially for younger patients. In spite of substantial improvements, new materials and operation techniques are still not able to prevent a shorter running life of prostheses in this group. The present work aims at evaluating clinical and radiological mid-term results of the femoral neck prosthesis CUT (ESKA Orthodynamics Lübeck) to answer the question of whether this implant is recommendable for younger patients. Method: Between 2001 and 2005 a consecutive series of 99 CUT prostheses was performed in 86 patients (50 female, 36 male) with a mean age of 50 (17–72) years and again evaluated clinically and radiologically after 5.4 (1.7–6.5) years. 84 cases were operated using a posterior approach and 15 cases were operated according to the anterolateral Watson-Jones approach. For clinical evaluation the Harris hip score and the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain measurement were applied. Standard anteroposterior radiographs of the pelvis and lateral radiographs of the operated hip were compared to radiographs taken in the recovery room by two independent observers. Interobserver measurement discrepancy of the implant angle was 2.6 ± 1.4°. With 4° being the maximum discrepancy, it was defined as the threshold of the normal range of 145° (141–149°). Additionally, the amount of femoral neck resection, the contact of the medial corticalis with the proximal stem, and the contact of the lateral corticalis with the distal part of the stem, periarticular ossifications and stable fixation by bone ingrowth according to Engh et al. were evaluated. Five delineated sections around the femoral component for evaluation of looseness or progressive loosening were used according to Gruen et al. Radiological evaluation of the cup was perfomed according to Charnley and DeLee. Results: The survival rate according to Kaplan-Meier was 98 % after on average 6.6 years. The Harris hip score significantly improved from 50 (16–83) points preoperatively to 98 (40–100) points at the time of follow-up (p ≤ 0.05). 82 % achieved an excellent result (91–100 points), 10 % a good (91–90 points), 4 % had a moderate (71–80 points) and 4 % had a bad (< 70 points) result. Six prostheses had to be revised. One of them had to be changed to a cementless standard stem after 5 years because of aseptic loosening. Another one had to be revised after 2.7 years because of chronic thigh pain. Two painful hips had a capsular revision. In one case the liner had to be changed and one case had an exchange of the femoral ball for a better femoral offset. The VAS revealed a significant reduction of pain in rest and under load (p ≤ 0.05). 92 % had a correct subcapital neck resection. The recommended implant angle of 145° was seen in 72 % while a valgus alignment in 18 % and a varus alignment in 10 % was measured. Undersizing of the CUT-prosthesis was seen in 27 cases. Nine of these cases developed a varus alignment. Osseous integration of the cup and stem was seen in 100 % and in 95 %, respectively. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the CUT prosthesis as a bone-preserving prosthesis with good functional and radiological results and therefore as an alternative joint replacement in younger patients.
Schlüsselwörter
Schenkelhalsprothese CUT - metaphysäre Verankerung - Ergebnisse
Key words
femoral neck prosthesis CUT - metaphyseal fixation - results
Literatur
1
McLaughlin J R, Lee K R.
Total hip arthroplasty with an uncemented femoral component.
J Bone Joint Surg [Br].
1997;
79
900-907
2
Traulsen F C, Hassenpflug J, Hahne H J.
Long term results with cementfree total hip prostheses (Zweymuller).
Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb.
2001;
139
206-211
3
Berry D J, Harmsen W S, Cabanela M E et al.
Twenty-five-year survivorship of two thousand consecutive primary Charnley total hip replacements: factors affecting survivorship of acetabular and femoral components.
J Bone Joint Surg [Am].
2002;
84
171-177
4 Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland .Pressemitteilung Nr. 364 vom 24. 9. 2009.
5
Arthursson A, Furnes O, Havelin L I et al.
A report from the Norwegian Arthroplasty register.
Acta Orthop.
2007;
78
711-718
6
Decking R, Puhl W, Simon U et al.
Changes in strain distribution of loaded proximal femora caused by different types of cementless femoral stems.
Clin Biomech.
2006;
21
495-501
7
Decking R, Rokahr C, Zurstegge M et al.
Maintenance of bone mineral density after implantation of a femoral neck hip prosthesis.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord.
2008;
9
17
8
Thomas W, Grundei H.
Die ESKA-Schenkelhalsendoprothese zur inneren Fixation CUT.
Orthop Prax.
1999;
35
646-652
9
Steinhauser E, Ellenrieder M, Gruber G et al.
Die Lastübertragung verschiedener Schenkelhalsendoprothesen auf das Femur.
Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb.
2006;
144
386-393
10
Koebke J, Xepulias P, Thomas W.
Schenkelhalsprothese Typ CUT – eine funktionell-morphologische Analyse.
Biomed Technik.
2000;
45
135-140
11
Harris W H.
Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end result study using a new method of end result evaluation.
J Bone Joint Surg [Am].
1969;
51
737-755
12
Huskisson E C.
Measurement of pain.
Lancet.
1974;
2
1127-1131
13
Engh C A, Bobyn J D, Glassman A H.
Porous coated hip replacement.
J Bone Joint Surg [Br].
1987;
69
45-55
14
Gruen T A, McNeice G M, Amstutz H C.
Modes of failure of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening.
Clin Orthop Relat Res.
1979;
141
17-27
15
DeLee J G, Charnley J.
Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement.
Clin Orthop Relat Res.
1976;
121
20-32
16
Hodgkinson J P, Wroblewski B M.
The correlation between the roentgenographic appearance and operative findings at the bone-cement junction of the socket in Charnley low-friction arthroplasties.
Clin Orthop Relat Res.
1988;
228
105-109
17
Slooff T J, Schreurs B W, Schimmel J W et al.
Acetabular and femoral reconstruction with impacted graft and cement.
Clin Orthop Relat Res.
1996;
324
108-115
18
Brooker A F, Bowerman J W, Robinson R A et al.
Ectopic ossification following total hip replacement. Incidence and a method of classification.
J Bone Joint Surg [Am].
1973;
55
1629-1632
19
Havelin L I, Fenstad A M, Salomonsson R et al.
The Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association: a unique collaboration between 3 national hip arthroplasty registries with 280201 THRs.
Acta Orthop.
2009;
80
393-401
20
Neumann D R, Thaler C, Hitzl W et al.
Long-term results of a contemporary metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty.
J Arthroplasty.
2009;
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth2009.05.018
21
Eswaramoorthy V, Moonot P, Kalairajah Y et al.
The Metasul metal-on-metal articulation in primary total hip replacement.
J Bone Joint Surg [Br].
2008;
90
1278-1283
22
Malchau M, Herberts P, Eisler T et al.
The Swedish total hip replacement register.
J Bone Joint Surg [Am].
2002;
84 (Suppl. 2)
2-20
23
Ishaque B A, Donle E, Gils J et al.
8-Jahres-Resultate der Schenkelhalsendoprothese ESKA-CUT.
Z Orthop Unfall.
2009;
147
158-165
24
Ishaque B A, Gils J, Wienbeck S et al.
Ergebnisse nach Wechsel von Schenkelhalsprothesen – Druckscheibenprothese versus ESKA-CUT-Prothese.
Z Orthop Unfall.
2009;
147
79-88
25
Ender S A, Machner A, Pap G et al.
Cementless CUT femoral neck prosthesis: increased rate of aseptic loosening after 5 years.
Acta Orthop.
2007;
78
616-621
26
Rudert M, Leichtle U, Leichtle C et al.
Implantationstechnik der Schenkelhalsprothese Typ CUT beim Hüftgelenkersatz.
Operat Orthop Traumatol.
2007;
19
458-472
27
Stukenborg-Colsman C.
Schenkelhalsendoprothesen.
Orthopäde.
2007;
36
347-352
28
Ender S A, Machner A, Pap H et al.
Schenkelhalsendoprothese Typ CUT.
Orthopäde.
2006;
35
841-847
29
Ender S A, Machner A, Hubbe J et al.
Mittelfristige Ergebnisse der Schenkelhals-Endoprothese Typ CUT.
Z Orthop.
2006;
144
477-483
30
Thomas W, Lucente L, Mantegna N et al.
Die ESKA- (CUT) Endoprothese.
Orthopäde.
2004;
33
1243-1248
31
Specht J, Schneider T, Mecklenbeck W et al.
Die Schenkelhalsendoprothese Cut 2000 – erste klinische, röntgenologische und szintigraphische Ergebnisse.
Orthopädische Praxis.
2003;
39
307-311
32
Saito S, Saito M, Nishina T et al.
Long-term results of total hip arthroplasty for osteonecrosis of the femoral head.
Clin Orthop Relat Res.
1989;
244
198-207
33
Conell C N, Salvati E A, Pellicci P M.
Long-term follow-up of total hip replacement in patients with osteonecrosis.
Orthop Clin North Am.
1985;
16
757-769
34
Elke R, Morscher E.
Die Totalprothesenarthroplastik bei Hüftkopfnekrose.
Orthopäde.
1990;
19
236-241
35
Schneider E, Ahrendt J, Niethard F-U et al.
Gelenk erhalten? Gelenk ersetzen?.
Z Orthop.
1989;
127
163-168
36
Brinker M R, Rosenbery A G, Kull L et al.
Primary total hip arthroplasty using non-cemented porous coated femoral components in patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head.
J Arthroplasty.
1994;
9
457-462
37
Kantor S G, Huo M H, Huk O L et al.
Cemented total hip arthroplasty in patients with osteonecrosis: a 6 year minimum follow-up study of second-generation cementtechnique.
J Arthroplasty.
1996;
11
267-272
38
Ritter M A, Meding J B.
A comparison of osteonecrosis and osteoarthritis patients following total hip arthroplasty. A long-term follow-up study.
Clin Orthop.
1986;
206
139-146
39
Kim Y H, Oh S H, Kim J S.
Primary total hip arthroplasty with a second-generation cementless total hip prosthesis in patients younger than fifty years of age.
J Bone Joint Surg [Am].
2003;
85
109-114
40
Sell S, Schleh T, Handel M et al.
Heterotope Ossifikationen nach künstlichem Hüftgelenksersatz.
Operat Orthop Traumatol.
2000;
12
328-340
41
Brown T E, Larson B, Shen F et al.
Thigh pain after cementless total hip arthroplasty.
J Am Acad Orthop Sug.
2002;
10
385-392
42
Oh J, Harris W H.
Proximal strain distribution in the loaded femur.
J Bone Joint Surg [Am].
1978;
60
75-85
43
Briem D, Schneider M, Bogner N et al.
Mid-term results of 155 patients treated with a collum femoris preserving (CFP) short stem prosthesis.
Int Orthop.
2010;
DOI: 10.1007/s00264-010-1020-x
44
Delaunay C, Cazeau C, Kapandji A L.
Cementless primary total hip replacement. Four to eight vear results with the Zweymueller-Alloclassic prothesis.
Int Orthop.
1998;
22
1-5
Dr. Wolfram Steens
Klinik für Orthopädie Paracelsus-Klinik
Lipper Weg 11
45770 Marl
Telefon: 0 23 65/90 25 01
Fax: 0 23 65/90 25 09
eMail: wsteens@gmx.de