Literature DB >> 21902131

Cemented femoral fixation: the North Atlantic divide.

David W Murray1.   

Abstract

In the United Kingdom, more cemented than cementless stems are implanted, whereas in North America, few cemented stems are implanted. This is primarily because cemented stems have not performed well in North America, whereas they have in the United Kingdom, as different designs have been used. The majority of cemented stems used in the United Kingdom are polished, collarless, and tapered. These are forgiving, as they subside within the cement mantle and compress the cement and stabilize the interface. They perform well in both young and active patients and elderly patients. They also do well in osteoporotic bone, with deformity, or with suboptimal cementing techniques. As the position of the stem can be varied, it is simple to achieve appropriate leg length, offset, and version. Cement can be used to deliver antibiotics locally. If revision is necessary, it is relatively straightforward. Cement has numerous advantages that outweigh the main disadvantage of an extended operating time. Copyright 2011, SLACK Incorporated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21902131     DOI: 10.3928/01477447-20110714-25

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


  5 in total

1.  CORR Insights®: Is Cemented or Cementless Femoral Stem Fixation More Durable in Patients Older Than 75 Years of Age? A Comparison of the Best-performing Stems.

Authors:  Nikolaos V Bardakos
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Clinical Faceoff: Where Are We Going With Femoral Stem Fixation in THA?

Authors:  Joseph T Moskal; Susan G Capps; C Anderson Engh; Anders Troelsen
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-03-28       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Long-term (20- to 25-year) results of an uncemented tapered titanium femoral component and factors affecting survivorship.

Authors:  Marcus R Streit; Moritz M Innmann; Christian Merle; Thomas Bruckner; Peter R Aldinger; Tobias Gotterbarm
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-05-14       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Have cementless and resurfacing components improved the medium-term results of hip replacement for patients under 60 years of age?

Authors:  Simon S Jameson; James Mason; Paul Baker; Paul J Gregg; Martyn Porter; David J Deehan; Mike R Reed
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2014-10-06       Impact factor: 3.717

5.  Implant Optimisation for Primary Hip Replacement in Patients over 60 Years with Osteoarthritis: A Cohort Study of Clinical Outcomes and Implant Costs Using Data from England and Wales.

Authors:  Simon S Jameson; James Mason; Paul N Baker; Paul J Gregg; David J Deehan; Mike R Reed
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-11-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.