Literature DB >> 17661036

Containment versus impingement: finding a compromise for cup placement in total hip arthroplasty.

K-H Widmer1.   

Abstract

Recommendations for cup containment and impingement may provide conflicting directions for component orientation in total hip arthroplasty. For optimal containment, the cup is positioned with respect to the acetabular bone, resulting in coincidence of the rim of the cup and the acetabulum. This results in good coverage and symmetric load transfer, leading to good long-term stability, but occasionally necessitates more abduction of the cup than that recommended by the safe zone. On the other hand, placement of the cup for an optimal range of motion would lead to only partial containment, with a higher risk of component loosening and revision. The most effective compromise is to use a prosthesis that has a large safe zone, realised by a high head-to-neck ratio, and orienting the cup such that a good containment is achieved and the safe zone is respected. Computer navigation or smart aiming devices may help to find the best relative orientation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17661036      PMCID: PMC2267522          DOI: 10.1007/s00264-007-0429-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  14 in total

1.  Load transfer and fixation mode of press-fit acetabular sockets.

Authors:  K-H Widmer; B Zurfluh; E W Morscher
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  Compliant positioning of total hip components for optimal range of motion.

Authors:  K-H Widmer; B Zurfluh
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 3.494

3.  [Transmission of force to the trabecular structures of the proximal end of the femur].

Authors:  R Elke; S Marugg
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Cup containment and orientation in cemented total hip arthroplasties.

Authors:  A Sarmiento; E Ebramzadeh; W J Gogan; H A McKellop
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1990-11

5.  The safe-zones for combined cup and neck anteversions that fulfill the essential range of motion and their optimum combination in total hip replacements.

Authors:  Fumihiro Yoshimine
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.712

6.  The impact of the CCD-angle on range of motion and cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  K-H Widmer; M Majewski
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.063

Review 7.  Current status of acetabular fixation in primary total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  E W Morscher
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  The anatomic basis of femoral component design.

Authors:  P C Noble; J W Alexander; L J Lindahl; D T Yew; W M Granberry; H S Tullos
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1988-10       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Experimental determination of friction characteristics at the trabecular bone/porous-coated metal interface in cementless implants.

Authors:  A Shirazi-Adl; M Dammak; G Paiement
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res       Date:  1993-02

10.  Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties.

Authors:  G E Lewinnek; J L Lewis; R Tarr; C L Compere; J R Zimmerman
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1978-03       Impact factor: 5.284

View more
  33 in total

1.  Improving cup positioning using a mechanical navigation instrument.

Authors:  Simon D Steppacher; Jens H Kowal; Stephen Barry Murphy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Computer assisted determination of acetabular cup orientation using 2D-3D image registration.

Authors:  Guoyan Zheng; Xuan Zhang
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2010-02-24       Impact factor: 2.924

3.  Do large femoral heads reduce the risks of impingement in total hip arthroplasty with optimal and non-optimal cup positioning?

Authors:  Gianluca Cinotti; Niccolò Lucioli; Andrea Malagoli; Carlo Calderoli; Ferdinando Cassese
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-02-17       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  The effect of femoral neck osteotomy on femoral component position of a primary cementless total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Dimitris Dimitriou; Tsung-Yuan Tsai; Young-Min Kwon
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-03-20       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 5.  Restoration of center of rotation and balance of THR.

Authors:  Zachary C Lum; Lawrence D Dorr
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2018-09-06

6.  [Measurement of acetabular cup inclination in anteroposterior pelvic radiogram : An indicator of quality after primary total hip arthroplasty?]

Authors:  T Loitsch; T Freitag; F Leucht; H Reichel; R Bieger
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 1.087

7.  Is the acetabular cup orientation after total hip arthroplasty on a two dimension or three dimension model accurate?

Authors:  Benjamin Craiovan; Tobias Renkawitz; Markus Weber; Joachim Grifka; Lutz Nolte; Guoyan Zheng
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-04-16       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Risk of impingement and third-body abrasion with 28-mm metal-on-metal bearings.

Authors:  Ian C Clarke; Jean-Yves Lazennec; Adrien Brusson; Christina Savisaar; John G Bowsher; Michelle Burgett; Thomas K Donaldson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Effect of femoral neck modularity upon the prosthetic range of motion in total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Glen A Turley; Damian R Griffin; Mark A Williams
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2014-06-27       Impact factor: 2.602

Review 10.  Navigated cup implantation in hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Johannes Beckmann; Dirk Stengel; Markus Tingart; Jürgen Götz; Joachim Grifka; Christian Lüring
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.717

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.