Literature DB >> 11742444

Stem design and dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty: clinical results and computer modeling.

R L Barrack1, R A Butler, D R Laster, P Andrews.   

Abstract

The effect of the size and shape of the neck and the taper of the femoral stem on dislocation rate after revision total hip arthroplasty was examined. Design I had a large (14/16), long taper with a circular neck cross-section; a fixed 42-mm offset; and a neck that was anteverted relative to the stem. Design II was characterized by a smaller (12/14), shorter taper; a trapezoidal neck cross-section; a progressive (40-50 mm) offset; and no neck anteversion relative to the stem. The stems were digitized and placed through a range of motion using virtual reality software, and the cross-sectional area of the neck, length of the taper, and total arc of motion before impingement between the neck and liner were compared. The dislocation rate at a minimum of 2 years' follow-up was 15.4% (8 of 52) for design I compared with 4.3% (2 of 46) for design II. This finding was consistent with the results of computer modeling, which showed that design I had a cross-sectional area that was 32% greater and a total arc of motion that was 76% less compared with design II. The results suggest that neck and taper design may be an important factor in dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11742444     DOI: 10.1054/arth.2001.28359

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  22 in total

1.  [Diagnostics and therapy of luxation after total hip arthroplasty].

Authors:  B Preininger; F Haschke; C Perka
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  Short-term wear evaluation of thin acetabular liners on 36-mm femoral heads.

Authors:  Aaron J Johnson; LaQuawn Loving; Lizeth Herrera; Ronald E Delanois; Aiguo Wang; Michael A Mont
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Femoral revision with an extensively hydroxyapatite-coated femoral component.

Authors:  Lawrence V Gulotta; Andreas Baldini; Kristin Foote; Stephen Lyman; Bryan J Nestor
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2007-12-01

4.  Do large femoral heads reduce the risks of impingement in total hip arthroplasty with optimal and non-optimal cup positioning?

Authors:  Gianluca Cinotti; Niccolò Lucioli; Andrea Malagoli; Carlo Calderoli; Ferdinando Cassese
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-02-17       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Bony impingement limits design-related increases in hip range of motion.

Authors:  Adam Bunn; Clifford W Colwell; Darryl D D'Lima
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  What factors affect posterior dislocation distance in THA?

Authors:  Jim Nevelos; Aaron Johnson; Christopher Heffernan; James Macintyre; David C Markel; Michael A Mont
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Instability after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Brian C Werner; Thomas E Brown
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2012-08-18

8.  Bone-on-bone versus hardware impingement in total hips: a biomechanical study.

Authors:  Jacob M Elkins; Douglas R Pedersen; John J Callaghan; Thomas D Brown
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2012

9.  Late dislocation is associated with recurrence after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Takashi Itokawa; Yasuharu Nakashima; Takuaki Yamamoto; Goro Motomura; Masanobu Ohishi; Satoshi Hamai; Mio Akiyama; Masanobu Hirata; Daisuke Hara; Yukihide Iwamoto
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Dislocation and its recurrence after revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Kensei Yoshimoto; Yasuharu Nakashima; Takuaki Yamamoto; Jun-Ichi Fukushi; Goro Motomura; Masanobu Ohishi; Satoshi Hamai; Yukihide Iwamoto
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 3.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.