RESUMO
We compared retrospectively 31 patients with a periprosthetic fracture to 31 patients in a control group. The Finnish Arthroplasty Register was used to count all periprosthetic fractures treated by revision arthroplasty in Finland and in Tampere University Hospital district during the years 1990-1999. We used the date of the previous operation to find the control group patients operated on at the same time in the same hospital district. No other selection or matching criteria were used. The type of prosthesis, complications, age, BMI, cementation and primary diagnosis were compared. We found that patients who had a fracture as the primary diagnosis ran a 4.4 (95%CI = 1.4-14) times higher risk of periprosthetic fracture than those operated on for other reasons.
Assuntos
Artroplastia de Quadril/efeitos adversos , Fraturas do Quadril/etiologia , Fraturas do Quadril/cirurgia , Prótese de Quadril/efeitos adversos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Índice de Massa Corporal , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Feminino , Finlândia , Humanos , Artropatias/complicações , Artropatias/cirurgia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Reoperação/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Risco , Fatores SexuaisRESUMO
This study was based on data from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. From 1990 to 1999, 33,154 primary hip arthroplasties were performed in Finland. Only periprosthetic fractures treated by a revision arthroplasty were registered. The six most used femoral components were compared using survival analysis and Cox's regression model. The incidence of periprosthetic fractures was calculated separately for the years 1990-1994 and 1995-1999. The incidence in the first period was greater than in the latter. Survival analysis and Cox's regression model showed that gender, prosthesis type and age were of no significance as risk factors for periprosthetic fractures.