Literature DB >> 14679434

[Cemented versus cementless revision femoral stems using morselized allograft--a prospective, randomized study with 5 years follow-up].

E Nesse1, E Waage Nielsen, D Bastian.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are only few studies on hip revision using the impaction grafting technique. Furthermore, data on cementless femoral stems as compared to cemented and polished femoral stems are lacking. We wanted to determine whether cementless femoral stems were equally good in preserving bone mineral density around the femoral stem and in functional outcome.
METHOD: Consecutively 14 patients needing hip revisions for aseptic loosening in the stem with bone stock deficiency Paparowsky grade II were randomized into two groups intraoperatively. Morselized fresh-frozen bone allografts were impacted in both groups. The cemented group received polished Landos Fjord-CrCo stems and the uncemented group received the hydroxyapatite-coated Landos Corail-Titan stems. The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry was used to measure bone mineral density around the femoral stem according to Gruen zones. Function was measured by Merle d'Aubigné score. Patients were controlled at 0.5, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 60 months postoperatively.
RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between the BMD loss in the cemented vs. the uncemented group. The BMD loss was between 0-10 % in distal Gruen zones and was between 10-20 % in proximal Gruen zones. Functional scores were similar and reached a plateau of 16 in the Merle d'Aubigné score after 6 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Cemented technique in hip revisions using morselized bone allograft is as good as uncemented technique in preserving BMD measured by the DEXA method and restoring function in a 5 years follow-up.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14679434     DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-812405

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb        ISSN: 0044-3220


  4 in total

1.  Fixation and bone remodeling around a low stiffness stem in revision surgery.

Authors:  Johan Kärrholm; Reza Razaznejad
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  A Case of Cementless Impaction Bone Graft in a Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Requiring Calcar Reconstruction.

Authors:  Shigeo Ishiguro; Kunihiro Asanuma; Tatsuya Tamaki; Kazuhiro Oinuma; Akihiro Sudo
Journal:  Case Rep Orthop       Date:  2021-02-27

3.  Large femoral bone loss after hip revision using the uncemented proximally porous-coated Bi-Metric prosthesis: 22 hips followed for a mean of 6 years.

Authors:  Per Y Adolphson; Mats O F Salemyr; Olof G Sköldenberg; Henrik S G Bodén
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.717

4.  Bone mineral density changes in the graft after acetabular impaction bone grafting in primary and revision hip surgery.

Authors:  Davey M J M Gerhardt; Enrico De Visser; Baudewijn W Hendrickx; Berend W Schreurs; Job L C Van Susante
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2018-04-11       Impact factor: 3.717

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.