Literature DB >> 18760085

Experience with the Mayo conservative hip system.

A Hagel1, W Hein, D Wohlrab.   

Abstract

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: In the development of cementless total hip arthroplasty wear, loosening as well as stress shielding are considered as major issues. New results in literature specify survivorship of THA over 97%. Consequently the implant loosening and wear especially can be considered as almost solved. Therefore, it is essential to use bone preserving primary implants that allow for a physiological load transfer and cause no or only slight stress shielding at the proximal femur. The MAYO conservative hip stem with a wedge design ensuring immediate primary fixation of the stem with metaphyseal load transfer.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study was performed to review the first consecutive 316 MAYO conservative hip stems implanted at the Martin-Luther-University of Halle-Wittenberg (Germany). 85.4% (270 MAYO stems) were radiographic analysed and classified according to the HHS.
RESULTS: The mean HHS improved from 44.79 preoperatively to 93.58 postoperatively. 1.85% (5 MAYO stems) had to be replaced because of aseptic loosening. Furthermore the DEXA scans revealed the metaphyseal load transfer with increased bone density in the calcar region.
CONCLUSION: As especially younger patients will require one or more hip revision procedures during the course of their life due to their life due to their age and activity level. These patients should receive a primary implant with proximal load transfer. Only these implants can avoid stress shielding of the proximal femur. The minimally invasive implantation of these implants can also ensure an enhanced periprosthetic bone density an optimized postoperative rehabilitation phase.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18760085

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech        ISSN: 0001-5415            Impact factor:   0.531


  7 in total

1.  [Is shorter really better? : Philosophy of short stem prosthesis designs].

Authors:  J Jerosch
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  [Differences between short stem prostheses].

Authors:  J Jerosch
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 1.087

3.  Two- to 4-Year Followup of a Short Stem THA Construct: Excellent Fixation, Thigh Pain a Concern.

Authors:  Richard L Amendola; Devon D Goetz; Steve S Liu; John J Callaghan
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Early clinical results of a new conservative hip stem.

Authors:  Jaime J Morales de Cano; Christian Gordo; Jose M Illobre
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2013-02-27

5.  Long-term follow-up of bone remodelling after cementless hip arthroplasty using different stems.

Authors:  Steffen Brodt; Georg Matziolis; Bettina Buckwitz; Timo Zippelius; Patrick Strube; Andreas Roth
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-06-23       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 6.  Revision rate after short-stem total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review of 49 studies.

Authors:  Jakob van Oldenrijk; Jeroen Molleman; Michel Klaver; Rudolf W Poolman; Daniel Haverkamp
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2014-04-03       Impact factor: 3.717

7.  5-Year Clinical and Radiographic Results of the Direct Anterior Approach for Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Collared Cementless Femoral Short-Stem Prosthesis.

Authors:  Ali Darwich; Kim Pankert; Andreas Ottersbach; Marcel Betsch; Sascha Gravius; Mohamad Bdeir
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 4.241

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.