Literature DB >> 14646718

Revision total hip arthroplasty: the limits of fully coated stems.

Scott M Sporer1, Wayne G Paprosky.   

Abstract

Femoral revision with a 7-inch or 8-inch fully porous-coated stem may not provide reliable long-term results in patients with moderate bone loss. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the limits of fully porous-coated stems and to create a treatment algorithm for femoral deficiencies. Fifty-one patients with either a 10-inch or 9-inch calcar fully porous-coated stem, 10 patients with impaction bone grafting, and 10 patients with a modular tapered stem were evaluated at an average 4.2 years postoperatively. The mechanical failure rate among the 9-inch and 10-inch fully porous-coated stems was 0% in Type III B defects with femoral canals less than 19 mm (15 patients), 18% in Type IIIB defects with femoral canals greater than 19 mm (2 of 11 patients) and 37.5% in Type IV defects (three of eight patients). There were no mechanical failures observed among the bone packing or modular tapered stems. Patients with Type IIIB defects and a femoral canal less than 19 mm can be treated successfully with either a 10-inch or 9-inch calcar fully porous-coated stem. However, patients with Type IIIB defect and an endosteal canal greater than 19 mm or a Type IV defect require alternative methods of reconstruction such as a modular tapered stem or a bone packing procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14646718     DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000096803.78689.0c

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  25 in total

1.  [Cementless stems of the hip. Current status].

Authors:  H Effenberger; M Imhof; U Witzel; S Rehart
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  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

3.  What is the survivorship of fully coated femoral components in revision hip arthroplasty?

Authors:  Paul F Lachiewicz; Elizabeth S Soileau
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  The long modified extended sliding trochanteric osteotomy.

Authors:  Dror Lakstein; Yona Kosashvili; David Backstein; Oleg Safir; Paul Lee; Allan E Gross
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2009-10-16       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Femoral revision hip arthroplasty: a comparison of two stem designs.

Authors:  Corey J Richards; Clive P Duncan; Bassam A Masri; Donald S Garbuz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Increase of cortical bone after a cementless long stem in periprosthetic fractures.

Authors:  Eduardo García-Rey; Eduardo García-Cimbrelo; Ana Cruz-Pardos; Rosário Madero
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Cementless femoral revision in patients with a previous cemented prosthesis.

Authors:  Min Zeng; Jie Xie; Mingqing Li; Shaoru Lin; Yihe Hu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-02-19       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  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

9.  Midterm results following uncemented, modular, fully porous coated stem used in revision total hip arthroplasty: Comparison of two stem systems.

Authors:  Konrad Sebastian Wronka; Peter Herman Johan Cnudde
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2016-07-02

10.  Revision total hip arthroplasty with a porous-coated modular stem: 5 to 10 years follow-up.

Authors:  Dror Lakstein; David Backstein; Oleg Safir; Yona Kosashvili; Allan E Gross
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-06-16       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.