Abstract
Aims: This is a retrospective study, comparing prosthesis survivorship, complications and functional results in geriatric patients treated with different types of prosthetic replacement for subcapital fractures of the hip. Methods: In the years 1985–1999, 292 elderly (aged 65–80 years) patients with displaced, nonpathologic sub-capital hip fractures were operated on. Of those, 143 were lost to follow-up; therefore, prospectively collected data of 149 patients were retrospectively reviewed. 54 patients received a unipolar, 48 a bipolar prosthesis and 47 underwent a primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Mean follow-up was 5.3 years. The patients did not differ in pre-injury characteristics. Analysis of variance was used to compare the three patient groups in terms of early and late complications, need for revision surgery, and functional outcome. Results: A statistically signiþ-cant difference was noted, regarding need for revision surgery, since 5 (9.25%) of the unipolar and 5 (10.4%) of the bipolar prostheses had to be re-operated, compared to 2 (4.25%) from the THA group. Of note, 4 of the revised bipolar prostheses had loose stems. The THA group also proved superior, when recovery of instrumental activities was investigated. Conclusions: Elderly patients, whose biologic age poses high functional demands on them, with a displaced subcapital hip fracture, should receive a total hip arthroplasty. Stem loosening seems more likely, as a mode of failure, in bipolar prostheses, than acetabular erosion.
Theses abstracts were prepared by Professor Dr. Frantz Langlais. Correspondence should be addressed to him at EFORT Central Office, Freihofstrasse 22, CH-8700 Küsnacht, Switzerland.
