Literature DB >> 16570896

The uncemented isoelastic/isotitan total hip arthroplasty. A 10-15 years follow-up with bone mineral density evaluation.

Onkar N Nagi1, Senthil Kumar, Sameer Aggarwal.   

Abstract

The present study analyses the long-term outcome of isoelastic hip prostheses and their influence on the extent of periprosthetic bone remodeling. Ninety-two patients (102 hips) with Isoelastic/Isotitan uncemented total hip arthroplasty were evaluated after an average of 13.4 years. The average age of patients at surgery was 42.5 years. The clinical outcome was assessed based on the Harris hip score, complications and thigh pain. Bone mineral density (BMD) of the proximal femur in the seven Gruen zones was evaluated by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans with the contralateral hip serving as a control. The average Harris hip score at the most recent follow-up was 72 points, with 72 hips (70%) rating completely pain free. Eight stems required revision whereas none of the cups showed any evidence of loosening. The change in the mean BMD values between the femora on the operated side and the contralateral femora averaged 15% for all zones Although the isoelastic stems are no longer used owing to their high loosening rate, it appears that this prosthesis preserved periprosthetic bone better than reported for cemented or uncemented metallic implants. Besides, the provision of a titanium coating on the isoelastic stem, comparable to that on the RM cup, would presumably have improved its long-term fixation by encouraging bony ongrowth.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16570896

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Orthop Belg        ISSN: 0001-6462            Impact factor:   0.500


  6 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.  Changes in periprosthetic bone remodelling after redesigning an anatomic cementless stem.

Authors:  Juan J Panisello; Vicente Canales; Luis Herrero; Antonio Herrera; Jesús Mateo; María J Caballero
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-01-11       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 3.  Do monoblock cups improve survivorship, decrease wear, or reduce osteolysis in uncemented total hip arthroplasty?

Authors:  Jelle J Halma; H Charles Vogely; Wouter J Dhert; Steven M Van Gaalen; Arthur de Gast
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-08-03       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Late remodeling around a proximally HA-coated tapered titanium femoral component.

Authors:  William N Capello; James A D'Antonio; Rudolph G Geesink; Judy R Feinberg; Marybeth Naughton
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-10-11       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 5.  Hip resurfacing versus total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review comparing standardized outcomes.

Authors:  Deborah A Marshall; Karen Pykerman; Jason Werle; Diane Lorenzetti; Tracy Wasylak; Tom Noseworthy; Donald A Dick; Greg O'Connor; Aish Sundaram; Sanne Heintzbergen; Cy Frank
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  A technique to remove a well-fixed titanium-coated RM acetabular cup in revision hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Fernando M J Judas; Rui F Dias; Francisco M Lucas
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2011-06-20       Impact factor: 2.359

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.