Literature DB >> 11041603

Precision of the measurements of periprosthetic bone mineral density in hips with a custom-made femoral stem.

F Martini1, C Lebherz, F Mayer, U Leichtle, E Kremling, S Sell.   

Abstract

Our aim was to determine the precision of the measurements of bone mineral density (BMD) by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry in the proximal femur before and after implantation of an uncemented implant, with particular regard to the significance of retro- and prospective studies. We examined 60 patients to determine the difference in preoperative BMD between osteoarthritic and healthy hips. The results showed a preoperative BMD of the affected hip which was lower by a mean of 4% and by a maximum of 9% compared with the opposite side. In addition, measurements were made in the operated hip before and at ten days after operation to determine the effect of the implantation of an uncemented custom-made femoral stem. The mean increase in the BMD was 8% and the maximum was 24%. Previous retrospective studies have reported a marked loss of BMD on the operated side. The precision of double measurements using a special foot jig showed a modified coefficient of variation of 0.6% for the non-operated side in 15 patients and of 0.6% for the operated femur in 20 patients. The effect of rotation on the precision of the measurements after implantation of an uncemented femoral stem was determined in ten explanted femora and for the operated side in ten patients at 10 degrees rotation and in 20 patients at 30 degrees rotation. Rotation within 30 degrees influenced the precision in studies in vivo and in vitro by a mean of 3% and in single cases in up to 60%. Precise prediction of the degree of loss of BMD is thus only possible in prospective cross-sectional measurements, since the effect of the difference in preoperative BMD, as well as the apparent increase in BMD after implantation of an uncemented stem, is not known from retrospective studies. The DEXA method is a reliable procedure for determining periprosthetic BMD when positioning and rotation are strictly controlled.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11041603     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.82b7.9791

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br        ISSN: 0301-620X


  16 in total

1.  Bone remodelling around the Metha short stem in total hip arthroplasty: a prospective dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry study.

Authors:  Matthias Lerch; Annelene von der Haar-Tran; Henning Windhagen; Bernd A Behrens; Patrick Wefstaedt; Christina M Stukenborg-Colsman
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Periprosthetic bone remodelling of two types of uncemented femoral implant with proximal hydroxyapatite coating: a 3-year follow-up study addressing the influence of prosthesis design and preoperative bone density on periprosthetic bone loss.

Authors:  A I A Rahmy; T Gosens; G M Blake; A Tonino; I Fogelman
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-12-06       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Periprosthetic bone density as outcome of therapeutic response.

Authors:  Giovanni Iolascon; Gioconda Di Pietro; Annarita Capaldo; Carmine Gioia; Salvatore Gatto; Francesca Gimigliano
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2010-01

4.  The Adaptiva custom-made stem--our reasons for not using it anymore.

Authors:  Patrik Karl Reize; Nikolaus Wülker
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-05-31       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Development of periprosthetic bone mass density around the cementless Metha® short hip stem during three year follow up-a prospective radiological and clinical study.

Authors:  Laura Augustin; Sarah Boller; Cathrein Bobach; Alexander Jahnke; Gafar Adam Ahmed; Markus Rickert; Bernd Alexander Ishaque
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-09-03       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Periprosthetic DXA after total hip arthroplasty with short vs. ultra-short custom-made femoral stems: 37 patients followed for 3 years.

Authors:  Carlina V Albanese; Francesco S Santori; Laura Pavan; Ian D Learmonth; Roberto Passariello
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.717

7.  The cementless Bicontact stem in a prospective dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry study.

Authors:  Matthias Lerch; Agnes Kurtz; Henning Windhagen; Anas Bouguecha; Bernd A Behrens; Patrick Wefstaedt; Christina M Stukenborg-Colsman
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2012-08-04       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Large femoral bone loss after hip revision using the uncemented proximally porous-coated Bi-Metric prosthesis: 22 hips followed for a mean of 6 years.

Authors:  Per Y Adolphson; Mats O F Salemyr; Olof G Sköldenberg; Henrik S G Bodén
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.717

9.  Maintenance of bone mineral density after implantation of a femoral neck hip prosthesis.

Authors:  Ralf Decking; Christoph Rokahr; Matthias Zurstegge; Ulrich Simon; Jens Decking
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2008-01-31       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Bone mineral density after implantation of a femoral neck hip prosthesis--a prospective 5 year follow-up.

Authors:  Wolfram Steens; Friedrich Boettner; Rainer Bader; Ralf Skripitz; Alberto Schneeberger
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.