Literature DB >> 17909823

Revision total hip arthroplasty with an uncemented primary stem in 79 patients.

Fritz Thorey1, Matthias Lerch, Heike Kiel, Gabriela von Lewinski, Christina Stukenborg-Colsman, Henning Windhagen.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Revision in THA continues to be a technical challenge because of difficulties in fixation of the femoral component in mostly deficient bone in the proximal femur. In cases with minor cortical defects, the use of primary stems in revision surgery has also been described by some authors.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-nine patients with minor femoral bone defects were reviewed retrospectively (mean follow-up 6.8 +/- 3.9 years), who underwent a femoral component revision surgery using the uncemented primary Bicontact stem (Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany). Furthermore, the radiographs (anteroposterior and lateral) before, after surgery and at latest follow-up were analysed concerning femoral defects, proximal bone loss, and to determine the quality of bony fixation.
RESULTS: The average Harris hip score (HHS) was 42.2 +/- 20.8 preoperative and improved to 78.9 +/- 12.5 at latest follow-up (p < 0.001). Motion Score increased significantly from 2.7 +/- 1.9 to 3.5 +/- 1.4 (p < 0.05) and pain score decreased significantly from 5.7 +/- 2.9 to 3.6 +/- 2.4 (p = 0.005). During follow-up there were only four re-revisions within 2 years after revision. The results and clinical outcome of this study correspond to those published before, using primary cementless stems in cases of revision.
CONCLUSION: Therefore, the primary uncemented Bicontact stem appears to be a good alternative to other revision systems in well-selected femoral revision cases with minor defects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17909823     DOI: 10.1007/s00402-007-0462-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg        ISSN: 0936-8051            Impact factor:   3.067


  8 in total

1.  [Replacement of femoral hip prostheses].

Authors:  M Rudert; M Hoberg; P M Prodinger; R Gradinger; B M Holzapfel
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 0.955

Review 2.  Femoral revision with primary cementless stems: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Luca Cavagnaro; Matteo Formica; Marco Basso; Andrea Zanirato; Stefano Divano; Lamberto Felli
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2017-07-01

Review 3.  [Revision hip arthroplastiy of the hip joint. Revision of the femur: which implant is indicated when?].

Authors:  A Gruner; K-D Heller
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty with Primary Stem or Full-Porous-Coated Long Stem for Aseptic Femoral Component Loosening: A Matched-Pair Study.

Authors:  Meng-Huan Tsai; Chun-Chieh Chen; Chih-Hsiang Chang; Yuhan Chang; Pang-Hsin Hsieh; Chih-Chien Hu
Journal:  Orthop Res Rev       Date:  2022-02-15

Review 5.  Short Stem for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) - Overview, Patient Selection and Perspectives by Using the Metha® Hip Stem System.

Authors:  Bernd Alexander Ishaque
Journal:  Orthop Res Rev       Date:  2022-03-24

6.  Long-term outcomes of cementless femoral stem revision with the Wagner cone prosthesis.

Authors:  Kyung-Soon Park; Sheng-Yu Jin; Jun-Hyuk Lim; Taek-Rim Yoon
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-06-11       Impact factor: 2.359

7.  Cemented versus uncemented total hip replacement for femoral neck fractures in elderly patients: a retrospective, multicentre study with a mean 5-year follow-up.

Authors:  Shuai Mao; Baomin Chen; Ying Zhu; Liang Qian; Jinluan Lin; Xinchao Zhang; Weiguang Yu; Guowei Han
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 2.359

8.  Downsizing in total hip arthroplasty. A short stem as a revision implant.

Authors:  Marcel Coutandin; Yama Afghanyar; Philipp Rehbein; Jens Dargel; Philipp Drees; Karl Philipp Kutzner
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2021-09-28       Impact factor: 1.087

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.