Literature DB >> 15112084

Unstable versus stable uncemented femoral stems: a radiological study of periprosthetic bone changes in two types of uncemented stems with different concepts of fixation.

Henrik Bodén1, Per Adolphson, Michael Oberg.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Uncemented stems in total hip arthroplasty (THA) are used increasingly often because they are believed to offer a reliable long-term fixation. However, periprosthetic bone remodelling has been a worrying issue. A proximal demineralization has been noted in femurs with well-fixed stems, and it has been explained as by-passing of mechanical forces along the fixed implant (stress-shielding). Aseptic loosening has been a major problem in several uncemented series with earlier designs. The objective for this study was to investigate how the host bone adapts to a loose stem compared with a well-fixed stem after a long time.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An investigation with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), scintimetry and radiological assessment was carried out in 20 patients 8 years after a THA for arthrosis with two different uncemented stems. Ten patients received a stem coated with polytetrafluoroethylene (Anaform); all prostheses showed migration and were considered unstable. Ten patients received a hydroxyapatite-coated stem (Bi-Metric); no prosthesis migrated.
RESULTS: Different remodelling patterns were seen. In the unstable group, the periprosthetic bone mineral density (BMD) was significantly reduced along the entire stem, while in the stable group only proximal bone loss was seen. The scintigraphic uptake was increased under the stem tip in both groups, and among unstable stems uptake was also increased in the calcar region.
CONCLUSION: The assessment of periprosthetic bone remodelling after uncemented THA with long-term observation shows a different host-bone response in stable versus unstable femoral implants. Prior to a femoral revision, measurement of the BMD could be beneficial; it may guide the surgeon when deciding which surgical technique to use.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15112084     DOI: 10.1007/s00402-004-0666-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg        ISSN: 0936-8051            Impact factor:   3.067


  9 in total

1.  Stabilisation of a loosened femoral gamma nail by percutaneous cement injection (cementoplasty): a new technique.

Authors:  Giacomo Gallo; Amandine Caudal; Nicolas Bronsard; Olivier Hauger; Nicolas Amoretti
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2015-07-03       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 2.  [Imaging of hip joint arthroplasty].

Authors:  M E Mayerhoefer; J Frühwald-Pallamar; C Czerny
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 0.635

3.  Measurement of early bone loss around an uncemented femoral stem.

Authors:  Berte Bøe; Tore Heier; Lars Nordsletten
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2011-04-19       Impact factor: 3.717

4.  A prospective randomized study comparing electrochemically deposited hydroxyapatite and plasma-sprayed hydroxyapatite on titanium stems.

Authors:  Berte Grimsmo Bøe; Stephan M Röhrl; Tore Heier; Finnur Snorrason; Lars Nordsletten
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-12-29       Impact factor: 3.717

5.  Randomised trial comparing bone remodelling around two uncemented stems using modified Gruen zones.

Authors:  René H M ten Broeke; Roel P M Hendrickx; Pieter Leffers; Liesbeth M C Jutten; Rudolph G T Geesink
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2012 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.135

6.  Short to Midterm Follow-Up of Periprosthetic Bone Mineral Density after Total Hip Arthroplasty with the Ribbed Anatomic Stem.

Authors:  Xiang-Dong Wu; Mian Tian; Yao He; Hong Chen; Yu Chen; Rahul Mishra; Wei Liu; Wei Huang
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2019-06-27       Impact factor: 3.411

7.  Extensively coated revision stems in proximally deficient femur: early results in 15 patients.

Authors:  S K S Marya; R Thukral
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 1.251

8.  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

9.  Preparation of the femoral bone cavity in cementless stems: broaching versus compaction.

Authors:  Mette H Hjorth; Maiken Stilling; Kjeld Søballe; Poul Torben Nielsen; Poul H Christensen; Søren Kold
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 3.717

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.