Literature DB >> 12533580

Primary total hip arthroplasty with a second-generation cementless total hip prosthesis in patients younger than fifty years of age.

Young-Hoo Kim1, S-H Oh, J-S Kim.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The early experience with cementless total hip replacement led to design modifications to increase the initial press-fit and stability of the femoral component, to reduce the diameter of the femoral head, and to improve the acetabular component, including the locking mechanism of the shell and the quality of the polyethylene liner. We performed a prospective study to assess the results in young patients who had been followed for a minimum of eight years after treatment with a primary total hip arthroplasty with a second-generation cementless prosthesis.
METHODS: Eighty patients (118 hips) were included in the study. There were fifty-eight men and twenty-two women; the mean age at the time of the operation was 46.8 years (range, twenty-one to forty-nine years). We used a cementless Duraloc series-100 or 1200 acetabular component with or without screw fixation, a polyethylene liner with a 22-mm inner diameter, and a cementless Profile femoral component in all hips. The average duration of follow-up was 9.8 years (range, eight to eleven years). Clinical follow-up (with use of the Harris hip score) and radiographic follow-up were performed at six weeks; at three, six, and twelve months; and yearly thereafter. Linear and volumetric wear were measured, and bone-remodeling and osteolysis were assessed.
RESULTS: The average Harris hip score improved from 48.8 points preoperatively to 92 points at the final follow-up examination. The prevalence of transitory thigh pain was 10% (twelve of 118 hips). There was no aseptic loosening. One hip was revised because of recurrent dislocation. The average amount of linear wear was 1.18 mm, and the average wear rate was 0.12 mm/yr. Fourteen hips (12%) had osteolysis in the calcar femorale and eleven hips (9%) had acetabular osteolysis, but all of the osteolytic lesions were <1 cm (2).
CONCLUSIONS: The mechanical fixation of the anatomic fit cementless Profile stem was excellent in this study of young patients who were particularly difficult to treat because of a high prevalence of osteonecrosis and developmental dysplasia. Although there was no aseptic loosening of the components and a relatively low prevalence of osteolysis, there was a high rate of linear wear of the polyethylene liner. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level IV (case series [no, or historical, control group]). See p. 2 for complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12533580     DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200301000-00017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  39 in total

1.  Is routine mid-term total hip arthroplasty surveillance beneficial?

Authors:  James A Keeney; Bradley S Ellison; William J Maloney; John C Clohisy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  [Revision hip stems: an analysis of the fixation].

Authors:  M Thomsen; J P Kretzer; C Heisel; C Lee; J Nadorf; E Jakubowitz
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.087

3.  [The femoral neck prosthesis CUT. Three- to six-year results].

Authors:  S A Ender; A Machner; G Pap; H Grasshoff; H W Neumann
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 4.  [Results for endoprosthetic care in patients younger than 50 years].

Authors:  J Ziegler; M Amlang; M Bottesi; S Kirschner; W-C Witzleb; K-P Günther
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 1.087

5.  Migration of the Duraloc cup after 5 years.

Authors:  Christoph Stihsen; Christof Pabinger; Roman Radl; Peter Rehak; Reinhard Windhager
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2007-07-03       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Promising mid-term results of total hip arthroplasties using an uncemented lateral-flare hip prosthesis: a clinical and radiographic study.

Authors:  Alex Leali; Joseph Fetto
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2007-02-14       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Radiostereometric analysis: the hip.

Authors:  F Bottner; E Su; B Nestor; B Azzis; T P Sculco; M Bostrom
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2005-09

8.  Total hip arthroplasty in patients 50 years or less: do we improve activity profiles?

Authors:  Margaret Kuhn; Marcie Harris-Hayes; Karen Steger-May; Gail Pashos; John C Clohisy
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 4.757

9.  Metal on metal hip resurfacing versus uncemented custom total hip replacement--early results.

Authors:  Nemandra A Sandiford; Sarah K Muirhead-Allwood; John A Skinner; Jia Hua
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2010-02-18       Impact factor: 2.359

10.  A stature-specific concept for uncemented, primary total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Georg W Omlor; Hannah Ullrich; Knut Krahmer; Alexander Jung; Günther Aldinger; Peter Aldinger
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.717

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.