Warning: Undefined array key "mm" in /www/wwwroot/www.ai-bt.com/si.php on line 10 Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /www/wwwroot/www.ai-bt.com/si.php on line 10 Fracture of the femoral component of a Brigham unicompartmental knee: a case report.

Literature DB >> 14530854

Fracture of the femoral component of a Brigham unicompartmental knee: a case report.

Konstantinos Panousis¹, Claire Murnaghan, Petra Koettig, Peter Grigoris.

Abstract

We report the failure of a femoral component in a unicompartmental knee replacement 6 years after implantation. The implant fractured 15 mm from the anterior tip, and scanning electron microscopy confirmed fatigue to be the cause of failure. The clinical and laboratory findings are presented, and the causes and implications of this mode of implant failure are discussed.

Entities: Disease

Mesh：

Year: 2003 PMID： 14530854 DOI： 10.1007/s00167-003-0434-z

Source DB: PubMed Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc ISSN： 0942-2056 Impact factor: 4.342

21 in total

1. Dislocation of the bearing of the Oxford lateral unicompartmental arthroplasty. A radiological assessment.

Authors: B J Robinson; J L Rees; A J Price; D J Beard; D W Murray; P McLardy Smith; C A F Dodd
Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Br Date: 2002-07

2. Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: outcome in 1,135 cases from the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty study.

Authors: S Lewold; O Robertsson; K Knutson; L Lidgren
Journal: Acta Orthop Scand Date: 1998-10

3. Unicondylar knee replacement.

Authors: J Insall; P Walker
Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 1976-10 Impact factor: 4.176

4. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clinical experience at 6- to 10-year followup.

Authors: R A Berger; D D Nedeff; R M Barden; M M Sheinkop; J J Jacobs; A G Rosenberg; J O Galante
Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 1999-10 Impact factor: 4.176

5. The effect of conformity, thickness, and material on stresses in ultra-high molecular weight components for total joint replacement.

Authors: D L Bartel; V L Bicknell; T M Wright
Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 1986-09 Impact factor: 5.284

6. Radiological changes five years after unicompartmental knee replacement.

Authors: A E Weale; D W Murray; J Baines; J H Newman
Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Br Date: 2000-09

7. Fatigue failure of the femoral component of a unicompartmental knee.

Authors: P M Sandborn; S D Cook; M A Kester; R J Haddad
Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 1987-09 Impact factor: 4.176

8. Fracture of the femoral component in unicompartmental total knee arthroplasty.

Authors: H U Cameron; R P Welsh
Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 1990-12 Impact factor: 4.757

9. Unicompartmental tibiofemoral resurfacing arthroplasty.

Authors: R S Laskin
Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 1978-03 Impact factor: 5.284

10. Long-term results after total condylar knee arthroplasty. Significance of radiolucent lines.

Authors: M L Ecker; P A Lotke; R E Windsor; J P Cella
Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 1987-03 Impact factor: 4.176

4 in total

1. Fracture of femoral component in an Oxford^® unicompartmental knee replacement with displaced posterior fragment: a case report.

Authors: V B Kiliyanpilakkil; S Subramanian
Journal: Ann R Coll Surg Engl Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 1.891