Literature DB >> 17496558

A modified transfemoral approach using modular cementless revision stems.

Bernd Fink1, Alexandra Grossmann, Svenja Schubring, Martin S Schulz, Martin Fuerst.   

Abstract

The transfemoral approach in its traditional form, using a nonmodular Wagner self-locking revision stem, has the disadvantages of a less predictable union rate of the bony flap and a high rate of stem subsidence. To investigate whether this situation can be improved by using a modified transfemoral approach and modular curved cementless revision stems, we prospectively analyzed 68 hip revisions and followed them clinically and radiographically for a minimum of 24 months (mean +/- standard deviation, 32.4 +/- 11.2 months). One year after the operation, the osteotomy showed bony consolidation in all but one case (98.5%). We noted subsidence in six cases (8.8%) and two of these stems became loose. In all of these cases, the circular fixation zone of the stem in the isthmus of the femur was less than 3 cm. The Harris hip score improved continuously from 41.4 +/- 14.5 points preoperatively to 85.9 +/- 14.6 points 24 months postoperatively. The modified transfemoral approach in combination with a curved, modular revision stem showed reproducibly good results concerning union of the bony flap and subsidence of the stem if the fixation zone was not less than 3 cm.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17496558     DOI: 10.1097/BLO.0b013e3180986170

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  10 in total

1.  Treatment of a femoral shaft fracture in a patient with congenital hip disease: a case report.

Authors:  George A Tsakotos; Stefanos D Koutsostathis; George A Macheras
Journal:  J Med Case Rep       Date:  2010-07-22

2.  Revision arthroplasty in periprosthetic fractures of the proximal femur.

Authors:  B Fink
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2014-09-28       Impact factor: 1.154

Review 3.  [Hip dislocation after revision arthroplasty : Risk assessment and treatment strategies].

Authors:  P M Prodinger; J Schauwecker; H Mühlhofer; N Harrasser; F Pohlig; C Suren; R von Eisenhart-Rothe
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Stem and osteotomy length are critical for success of the transfemoral approach and cementless stem revision.

Authors:  Daniel F A de Menezes; Pierre Le Béguec; Hans-Peter Sieber; Mathias Goldschild
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-08-06       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Single-stage Acetabular Revision During Two-stage THA Revision for Infection is Effective in Selected Patients.

Authors:  Bernd Fink; Michael Schlumberger; Damian Oremek
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-03-28       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  [Modular noncemented femoral stem system in revision total hip arthroplasty].

Authors:  M D Schofer; T Efe; T J Heyse; N Timmesfeld; R Velte; F Hinrichs; J Schmitt
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.087

7.  Two-stage cementless revision of infected hip endoprostheses.

Authors:  Bernd Fink; Alexandra Grossmann; Martin Fuerst; Peter Schäfer; Lars Frommelt
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-11-11       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 8.  The transfemoral approach for controlled removal of well-fixed femoral stems in hip revision surgery.

Authors:  Bernd Fink
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2019-11-09

9.  Technical Note for Transfemoral Implantation of Tapered Revision Stems. The Advantage to Stay Short.

Authors:  Bernd Fink
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2021-04-24

Review 10.  Trochanteric osteotomy in revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Kavin Sundaram; Ahmed Siddiqi; Atul F Kamath; Carlos A Higuera-Rueda
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2020-09-10
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.