Literature DB >> 19751014

The dislocator, early and late: the role of large heads.

Michael D Skeels1, Keith R Berend, Adolph V Lombardi.   

Abstract

Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a potentially devastating complication that can be difficult to manage. Many patient and mechanical factors have been associated with an increased risk of dislocation. Conservative treatments such as abduction bracing have not proven effective at treating this difficult problem. Surgical options include the use of larger femoral heads, unconstrained tripolar femoral heads, and constrained devices. While each device has its merits, there is no one-size-fits-all solution to this problem. With the development of highly cross-linked polyethylene and its superior wear characteristics and mechanical properties, the use of larger femoral heads is now available. Twenty-six hips in 25 patients who underwent revision surgery for recurrent dislocation were treated with a femoral head =/>36 mm in diameter. The direct lateral surgical approach was used in 24 hips, and the posterior and anterior supine intermuscular approaches were used in 1 hip each. One patient died 5 years after revision surgery, and 3 patients have not returned for clinical follow-up over the past 2 years. Four hips subsequently suffered a repeat dislocation, for a dislocation rate of 17%. Two patients underwent a subsequent surgery: 1 irrigation and debridement and 1 hardware removal. There have been no other revisions to date. Mean time to follow-up is 17.2 months. While the use of large femoral heads for the treatment of dislocation is warranted, continued follow-up is necessary.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19751014     DOI: 10.3928/01477447-20090728-14

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthopedics        ISSN: 0147-7447            Impact factor:   1.390


  5 in total

1.  The Frank Stinchfield Award: Dislocation in revision THA: do large heads (36 and 40 mm) result in reduced dislocation rates in a randomized clinical trial?

Authors:  Donald S Garbuz; Bassam A Masri; Clive P Duncan; Nelson V Greidanus; Eric R Bohm; Martin J Petrak; Craig J Della Valle; Allan E Gross
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Efficacy of revision surgery for the dislocating total hip arthroplasty: report from a large community registry.

Authors:  Tiare Salassa; Daniel Hoeffel; Susan Mehle; Penny Tatman; Terence J Gioe
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  What factors affect posterior dislocation distance in THA?

Authors:  Jim Nevelos; Aaron Johnson; Christopher Heffernan; James Macintyre; David C Markel; Michael A Mont
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  A double mobility acetabular implant for primary hip arthroplasty in patients at high risk of dislocation.

Authors:  N L Vasukutty; R G Middleton; P Young; C Uzoigwe; B Barkham; S Yusoff; T H A Minhas
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 1.891

5.  Cementless dual-mobility cup in total hip arthroplasty revision.

Authors:  Jean Louis Prudhon; François Steffann; André Ferreira; Régis Verdier; Thierry Aslanian; Jacques Caton
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 3.075

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.