Literature DB >> 12478503

Extensively porous-coated femoral revision for severe femoral bone loss: minimum 10-year follow-up.

C Anderson Engh1, Thomas J Ellis, Lisa M Koralewicz, James P McAuley, Charles A Engh.   

Abstract

Of 275 femoral revisions done at our institution from 1982 to 1986, we identified 34 patients (35 hips) who represented the senior author's (C.A.E., Sr.) most difficult revision cases as a result of extensive femoral bone loss at least 10 cm below the lesser trochanter. The patients were revised with fully porous-coated femoral components >or=190 mm. We evaluated 25 of the patients (26 hips) who had a minimum 10-year follow-up (mean, 13.3 years). Survivorship was 89% at 10 years with femoral revision as the endpoint (Kaplan-Meier). The femoral aseptic loosening rate was 15% (4 of 26). Three stems were loose but did not warrant reoperation. One stem was revised for aseptic loosening, 1 was revised for septic loosening, and 1 was revised for a fractured femoral component. Bypassing weak or absent femoral bone with an extensively porous-coated stem is an effective reconstructive technique for patients with extensive femoral bone loss. Copyright 2002, Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12478503     DOI: 10.1054/arth.2002.35794

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


  15 in total

1.  Hip painful prosthesis: surgical view.

Authors:  Antonio Spinarelli; Vittorio Patella; Vito Conserva; Giovanni Vicenti; Vito Pesce; Silvio Patella
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2011-05

2.  Why revision total hip arthroplasty fails.

Authors:  Bryan D Springer; Thomas K Fehring; William L Griffin; Susan M Odum; John L Masonis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-10-31       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Are short fully coated stems adequate for "simple" femoral revisions?

Authors:  Matthew W Tetreault; Sanjai K Shukla; Paul H Yi; Scott M Sporer; Craig J Della Valle
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Revision hip arthroplasty using a cementless modular tapered stem.

Authors:  Christophe Pattyn; Alexander Mulliez; René Verdonk; Emmanuel Audenaert
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-06-24       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  CORR Insights®: modular tapered implants for severe femoral bone loss in THA: reliable osseointegration but frequent complications.

Authors:  Curtis W Hartman
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-09-09       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Proximal femoral replacement in non-oncologic patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Ivan De Martino; Rocco D'Apolito; Allina A Nocon; Thomas P Sculco; Peter K Sculco; Mathias P Bostrom
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-11-10       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Stem and osteotomy length are critical for success of the transfemoral approach and cementless stem revision.

Authors:  Daniel F A de Menezes; Pierre Le Béguec; Hans-Peter Sieber; Mathias Goldschild
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-08-06       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Modular tapered implants for severe femoral bone loss in THA: reliable osseointegration but frequent complications.

Authors:  Nicholas M Brown; Matthew Tetreault; Cara A Cipriano; Craig J Della Valle; Wayne Paprosky; Scott Sporer
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  High survival of modular tapered stems for proximal femoral bone defects at 5 to 10 years followup.

Authors:  Andrew P Van Houwelingen; Clive P Duncan; Bassam A Masri; Nelson V Greidanus; Donald S Garbuz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Distal fixation stems for revision of total hip replacement.

Authors:  Fernando Lopreite; Leonel Perez Alamino; Harold Simesen de Bielke; German Garabano; Hernán Del Sel
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2021-02-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.