Literature DB >> 17345027

Uncemented femoral revision arthroplasty using the modular revision prosthesis MRP-TITAN revision stem.

Torsten Mumme1, Ralf Müller-Rath, Stefan Andereya, Dieter Christian Wirtz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Restoration of a painless hip joint capable of bearing weight by uncemented implantation of a rotationally stable, modular revision stem anchored in the diaphysis. INDICATIONS: Prosthetic stem loosening with osteolytic bone defects (defect classification types I-III according to Paprosky). Material failure with broken prosthesis. Sub- and/or periprosthetic femoral fractures. Tumors. CONTRAINDICATIONS: Extensive osteolysis preventing diaphyseal anchorage of the prosthesis. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: Transgluteal approach to the hip joint. Removal of the loose prosthetic stem and, if cemented, the bone cement as well. Excision of intramedullary granulation tissue. Reaming of the medullary cavity with flexible reaming shafts and form-fit, uncemented implantation of the star-shaped modular revision stem with diaphyseal press fit. If there is extensive loss of metaphyseal bone stock, augmentation with autogenous/allogenic bone should be performed. POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: Mobilization on two underarm crutches from the 1st postoperative day. Removal of the Redon drains after 48 h. Partial loading with 20 kg for 6 weeks postoperatively. If plain radiographs show unchanged seating of the prosthesis after 6 weeks, loading can be increased by 10 kg per week until full weight bearing is achieved; thrombosis prophylaxis is continued throughout. Radiologic checkups after 3, 6, and 12 months. After that, the patient should be checked annually.
RESULTS: 45 patients (n = 48 prostheses) with an average age of 67.2 years (min.-max. 42.4-87.4 years) were investigated. The average implantation time of the Modular Revision Prosthesis MRP-TITAN revision stem was 4.7 years (min.-max. 1.0-9.0 years). The Harris Hip Score for Paprosky bone defect types I-III had increased from 25.6 preoperatively to 71.4 postoperatively at the time of the final follow-up (< or = 0.05). Extensively defective bone was diagnosed preoperatively in 32 patients (> or = Paprosky IIB). Plain radiographs showed stable anchorage without migration in 44 patients. In one case, the stem (implantation time 2.36 years) was replaced due to increasing axial subsidence (> or = 5 mm). Good integration of bone graft with subsequent defect regeneration was seen in all patients with bone transplant (n = 30). Postoperative dislocation occurred in six patients and required closed reduction in four cases. Open reduction was performed in two patients, whereby the external rotation angle of the prosthetic neck was corrected without dismantling the distally anchored prosthetic stem components. The mechanical failure rate over the follow-up period of 9 years was one out of the 48 prospectively investigated prostheses. Rate of survival according to Kaplan-Meier was 97%.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17345027     DOI: 10.1007/s00064-007-1195-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol        ISSN: 0934-6694            Impact factor:   1.154


  9 in total

Review 1.  [What can be done when hip prostheses fail? : New trends in revision endoprosthetics].

Authors:  S Gravius; T Randau; D C Wirtz
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 2.  [Hip implant revision. Avoiding mistakes and managing risk].

Authors:  R Volkmann
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.087

3.  Outcome of a modular tapered uncemented titanium femoral stem in revision hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Maik Hoberg; Christian Konrads; Jana Engelien; Dorothee Oschmann; Michael Holder; Matthias Walcher; Maximilian Rudert
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-02-18       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  [Periprosthetic bone defects of the hip joint].

Authors:  D C Wirtz
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 1.154

5.  Similar outcomes between two-stage revisions for infection and aseptic hip revisions.

Authors:  Maik Hoberg; Christian Konrads; Jana Engelien; Dorothee Oschmann; Michael Holder; Matthias Walcher; André Steinert; Maximilian Rudert
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  [Bone defect adjusted strategy in revision arthroplasty of the hip : Wich implant in wich situation? Innovations and approved methods].

Authors:  B S Craiovan; J Grifka; A Keshmiri; B Moser; M Wörner; T Renkawitz
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 1.087

7.  Major acetabular prosthetic protrusion following total hip arthroplasty: a case report of a reconstruction challenge.

Authors:  Marc Prod'homme; Gilles Dietrich; Lionel Helfer; Jonas Pierre Müller; Marc Barrera Uso; Didier Grasset; Geoffroi Lallemand
Journal:  AME Case Rep       Date:  2022-07-25

8.  Impaction grafting in the femur in cementless modular revision total hip arthroplasty: a descriptive outcome analysis of 243 cases with the MRP-TITAN revision implant.

Authors:  Matthias D Wimmer; Thomas M Randau; Moritz C Deml; Rudolf Ascherl; Ulrich Nöth; Raimund Forst; Nadine Gravius; Dieter Wirtz; Sascha Gravius
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2013-01-11       Impact factor: 2.362

9.  Uncemented femoral revision arthroplasty using a modular tapered, fluted titanium stem: 5- to 16-year results of 163 cases.

Authors:  Dieter C Wirtz; Sascha Gravius; Rudolf Ascherl; Miguel Thorweihe; Raimund Forst; Ulrich Noeth; Uwe M Maus; Matthias D Wimmer; Günther Zeiler; Moritz C Deml
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2014-09-01       Impact factor: 3.717

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.