Literature DB >> 15173290

Revision total hip arthroplasty with use of a cemented femoral component. Results at a mean of ten years.

Christopher M Haydon1, Ramin Mehin, Stephen Burnett, Cecil H Rorabeck, Robert B Bourne, Richard W McCalden, Steven J MacDonald.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Revision of the femoral component of a total hip replacement with use of cement has been associated with early mechanical failure due to aseptic loosening. The purpose of the present study was to determine the long-term survival after revision of the femoral component with cement and to identify factors that were predictive of failure.
METHODS: The results of 129 revision total hip arthroplasties that had been performed with use of a cemented femoral stem were reviewed to determine component survival. Ninety-seven hips that had been followed for a minimum of five years were included in survival analysis and tests of significance. Harris hip scores were used to quantify clinical outcomes. Clinical and surgical factors were analyzed to determine whether they were predictive of failure.
RESULTS: The mean Harris hip score improved from 52 points preoperatively to 71 points at the time of the most recent follow-up (p < 0.001). The ten-year survival rate was 91% with rerevision of the femoral component because of aseptic loosening as the end point and 71% with mechanical failure as the end point. Patients who were more than sixty years old had greater long-term component survival and less pain than younger patients did (p < 0.05). A good-quality postoperative cement mantle was associated with better long-term radiographic signs of fixation (p < 0.001). Poor femoral bone quality was associated with an increased rate of rerevision for aseptic loosening (p = 0.021).
CONCLUSIONS: Revision with use of a cemented femoral component remains an option for selected patients, with an acceptable ten-year survival rate and fair radiographic evidence of fixation. Our patients had acceptable clinical outcomes at ten years, and few had notable pain. The best results may be achieved in older patients (those who are sixty years old or more) with adequate bone stock who are managed with modern cementing techniques.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15173290     DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200406000-00009

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


  15 in total

1.  Why revision total hip arthroplasty fails.

Authors:  Bryan D Springer; Thomas K Fehring; William L Griffin; Susan M Odum; John L Masonis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-10-31       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Bone remodeling after a mean of 10 years in diaphyseal cortical defects repaired with femoral revision using bypass fixation of extensively porous-coated stems with high stiffness.

Authors:  Kiyokazu Fukui; Ayumi Kaneuji; Tanzo Sugimori; Toru Ichiseki; Tadami Matsumoto
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2015-01-04

Review 3.  Femoral revision with primary cementless stems: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Luca Cavagnaro; Matteo Formica; Marco Basso; Andrea Zanirato; Stefano Divano; Lamberto Felli
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2017-07-01

Review 4.  Classifications In Brief: The Paprosky Classification of Femoral Bone Loss.

Authors:  David A Ibrahim; Navin D Fernando
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Management of femoral bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Saradej Khuangsirikul; Thanainit Chotanaphuti
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2019-12-14

6.  [Two-stage procedure to exchange septic total hip arthroplasties with late periprosthetic infection. Early results after implantation of a reverse modular hybrid endoprosthesis].

Authors:  G Walter; M Bühler; R Hoffmann
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 1.000

7.  Medium-term outcomes of cemented prostheses and cementless modular prostheses in revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Long Wang; Pengfei Lei; Jie Xie; Kanghua Li; Zixun Dai; Yihe Hu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2013-09-30       Impact factor: 4.379

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.  Revision total hip arthroplasty using the Zweymuller femoral stem.

Authors:  Matthew E Oetgen; Michael H Huo; Kristaps J Keggi
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2008-05-10

10.  Mid-term results of previously cemented hip arthroplasties revised with uncemented modular femoral components: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Tahir Mutlu Duymus; Zafer Solak; Yusuf Ozturkmen; Ibrahim Azboy; Serhat Mutlu; Mustafa Caniklioglu
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 2.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.