Literature DB >> 18534480

Five- to 10-year results using a noncemented modular revision stem without bone grafting.

Georg Köster1, Tim A Walde, Hans-Georg Willert.   

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate the 5- to 10-year results (mean, 6.2 years) of a modular uncemented revision stem (Profemur-R). From a total series of 184 consecutive stem revisions, the first 73 were evaluated. The implant was fixed without bone grafting in all cases. The average Harris hip score increased from 40 to 75. A complete remodeling of bone defects could be documented radiographically in 70% of the cases and a partial restoration in 30%. Progressive subsidence appeared in 2 stems. Three rerevisions were required, including 1 septic case. The survival rate with aseptic loosening as the end point was 96% over an average of 10 years. The revision prosthesis examined in this study can be considered a viable and useful option to reconstruct femoral defects in revision hip arthroplasty.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18534480     DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.08.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  15 in total

1.  Fracture of a modular femoral neck after total hip arthroplasty: a case report.

Authors:  Geoffrey Wright; Scott Sporer; Robert Urban; Joshua Jacobs
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Revision hip arthroplasty using a cementless modular tapered stem.

Authors:  Christophe Pattyn; Alexander Mulliez; René Verdonk; Emmanuel Audenaert
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-06-24       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Midterm results following uncemented, modular, fully porous coated stem used in revision total hip arthroplasty: Comparison of two stem systems.

Authors:  Konrad Sebastian Wronka; Peter Herman Johan Cnudde
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2016-07-02

4.  Management of severe femoral bone defect in revision total hip arthroplasty--a 236 hip, 6-14-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Guo-Qiang Zhang; Yan Wang; Ji-Ying Chen; Yong-Gang Zhou; Xiu-Tang Cao; Wei Chai; Ming Ni; Xiang Li
Journal:  J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci       Date:  2013-08-01

5.  Mid- to long-term results of the Cone-Conical modular system in revision hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Abd-Allah El Ashmawy; Hazem A H Hosny; Ahmed El-Bakoury; Rathan Yarlagadda; Jonathan Keenan
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2021-10-12       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Revision total hip arthroplasty with a porous-coated modular stem: 5 to 10 years follow-up.

Authors:  Dror Lakstein; David Backstein; Oleg Safir; Yona Kosashvili; Allan E Gross
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-06-16       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  [Revision arthroplasty of the hip: modularity of neck and metaphyseal components].

Authors:  G Köster; T A Walde
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 1.087

8.  High survival of modular tapered stems for proximal femoral bone defects at 5 to 10 years followup.

Authors:  Andrew P Van Houwelingen; Clive P Duncan; Bassam A Masri; Nelson V Greidanus; Donald S Garbuz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Mid-term outcomes of titanium modular neck femoral stems in revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Hervé Ouanezar; Thomas Jalaguier; Florent Franck; Vincent Pibarot; Hugo Bothorel; Mo Saffarini; Jean-Pierre Piton
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-03

10.  Stem modularity alone is not effective in reducing dislocation rate in hip revision surgery.

Authors:  Dario Regis; Andrea Sandri; Pietro Bartolozzi
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2009-11-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.