Literature DB >> 16720762

Biomechanical reconstruction of the hip: a randomised study comparing total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty.

J Girard1, M Lavigne, P-A Vendittoli, A G Roy.   

Abstract

We have compared the biomechanical nature of the reconstruction of the hip in conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA) and surface replacement arthroplasty (SRA) in a randomised study involving 120 patients undergoing unilateral primary hip replacement. The contralateral hip was used as a control. Post-operatively, the femoral offset was significantly increased with THA (mean 5.1 mm; -2.8 to 11.6) and decreased with SRA (mean -3.3 mm; -8.9 to 8.2). Femoral offset was restored within sd 4 mm in 14 (25%) of those with THA and in 28 (57%) of the patients receiving SRA (p < 0.001). In the THA group, the leg was lengthened by a mean of 2.6 mm (-6.04 to +12.9), whereas it was shortened by a mean of 1.9 mm (-7.1 to +2.05) in the SRA group, compared with the contralateral side. Leg-length inequality was restored within sd 4 mm in 42 (86%) of the SRA and 33 (60%) of the THA patients. The radiological parameters of acetabular reconstruction were similar in both groups. Restoration of the normal proximal femoral anatomy was more precise with SRA. The enhanced stability afforded by the use of a large-diameter femoral head avoided over-lengthening of the limb or increased offset to improve soft-tissue tension as occurs sometimes in THA. In a subgroup of patients with significant pre-operative deformity, restoration of the normal hip anatomy with lower pre-operative femoral offset or significant shortening of the leg was still possible with SRA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16720762     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B6.17447

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br        ISSN: 0301-620X


  41 in total

1.  Gait analysis after total hip replacement with hip resurfacing implant or Mallory-head Exeter prosthesis: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Mette K Petersen; Niels T Andersen; Poul Mogensen; Michael Voight; Kjeld Søballe
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-05-16       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  2011 Marshall Urist Young Investigator Award: when to release patients to high-impact activities after hip resurfacing.

Authors:  Katherine M Bedigrew; Erin L Ruh; Qin Zhang; John C Clohisy; Robert L Barrack; Ryan M Nunley
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing: 5-year clinical and radiographic results from a District General Hospital.

Authors:  B Ollivere; S Duckett; A August; M Porteous
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Correlation between groin pain and cup design of hip-resurfacing implants: a prospective study.

Authors:  Julien Girard; Erwan Pansard; Reda Ouahes; Henri Migaud; Cyril Delay; Laurent Vasseur
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-12-10       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Are leg length and hip offset comparable after hip resurfacing and cementless total hip arthroplasty?

Authors:  S Patel; R R Thakrar; J Bhamra; F Hossain; M Tengrootenhuysen; F S Haddad
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.891

6.  Reproducibility of radiographic assessment of femoral implant position after hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a pilot study.

Authors:  Régis Pailhé; Nicolas Reina; David Ancelin; Etienne Cavaignac; Laurent Maubisson; Akash Sharma; Philippe Chiron
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2013-04-05

7.  Biomechanical reconstruction of the hip: comparison between modular short-stem hip arthroplasty and conventional total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Florian Schmidutz; Marc Beirer; Patrick Weber; Farhad Mazoochian; Andreas Fottner; Volkmar Jansson
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Can patients return to high-impact physical activities after hip resurfacing? A prospective study.

Authors:  Julien Girard; Bruno Miletic; Anthony Deny; Henri Migaud; Nicolas Fouilleron
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-03-02       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Outcome of primary resurfacing hip replacement: evaluation of risk factors for early revision.

Authors:  Gareth H Prosser; Piers J Yates; David J Wood; Stephen E Graves; Richard N de Steiger; Lisa N Miller
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.717

10.  Does total hip arthroplasty restore native hip anatomy? three-dimensional reconstruction analysis.

Authors:  Tsung-Yuan Tsai; Dimitris Dimitriou; Guoan Li; Young-Min Kwon
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-06-26       Impact factor: 3.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.