Literature DB >> 21927967

Stable fixation of short-stem femoral implants in patients 70 years and older.

Ronak M Patel1, Matthew C Smith, Chase C Woodward, S David Stulberg.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Limitations of conventional uncemented femoral stems persist, including proximal-distal mismatch, nonideal load transfer, loss of bone, and difficulties with minimally invasive surgery. Metaphyseal-engaging short-stem implants have been designed to address these issues in THA. While these devices have been studied in younger patients, it is unclear whether they offer advantages in older patients. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked whether the stability and bony ingrowth of an off-the-shelf short stem in patients 70 years and older were similar to those achieved in patients younger than 70 years at 2-year followup. Furthermore, we asked whether pain and function scores were affected by age, bone quality, or varus alignment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 60 patients (65 hips) 70 years and older (mean, 75 years; range, 70-86 years) treated with an uncemented short stem (range, 90-105 mm). We compared radiographic alignment, stability, and bony ingrowth, as well as Harris hip scores and WOMAC pain scores, to a cohort of 89 patients (91 hips) younger than 70 years. Minimum followup was 24 months (mean, 35 months; range, 24-60 months).
RESULTS: Radiographs showed proximal bony ingrowth and stable fixation of all implants. Average Harris hip score at last followup was 88 (range, 70-100) for the 70 years and older cohort and 93 (range, 70-100) for younger than 70 years cohort; no patients reported thigh pain. Postoperative WOMAC scores averaged 6 (range, 0-43) and 5 (range, 0-25), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Short-stem implants provide solid, dependable fixation in osteoporotic bone at minimum 2-year followup, while meeting some of the limitations in conventional primary THA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 21927967      PMCID: PMC3254743          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-011-2063-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  44 in total

1.  Mid-term results of a custom-made short proximal loading femoral component.

Authors:  F S Santori; N Santori
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2010-09

Review 2.  Roentgen stereophotogrammetry. Review of orthopedic applications.

Authors:  J Kärrholm
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1989-08

3.  Clinical and radiographic evaluation of total hip replacement. A standard system of terminology for reporting results.

Authors:  R C Johnston; R H Fitzgerald; W H Harris; R Poss; M E Müller; C B Sledge
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Durability of second-generation extensively porous-coated stems in patients age 50 and younger.

Authors:  Jennifer A Moyer; Catherine M Metz; John J Callaghan; David W Hennessy; Steve S Liu
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-09-01       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Prevalence of primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 1990 through 2002.

Authors:  Steven Kurtz; Fionna Mowat; Kevin Ong; Nathan Chan; Edmund Lau; Michael Halpern
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  The anatomic basis of femoral component design.

Authors:  P C Noble; J W Alexander; L J Lindahl; D T Yew; W M Granberry; H S Tullos
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1988-10       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  "Modes of failure" of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening.

Authors:  T A Gruen; G M McNeice; H C Amstutz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1979-06       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  The accuracy and reproducibility of radiographic assessment of stress-shielding. A postmortem analysis.

Authors:  C A Engh; J P McAuley; C J Sychterz; M E Sacco; C A Engh
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Use of a hydroxyapatite-coated stem in patients with Dorr Type C femoral bone.

Authors:  Stephen J Kelly; Claire E Robbins; Benjamin E Bierbaum; James V Bono; Daniel M Ward
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Cementless double-tapered total hip arthroplasty in patients 75 years of age and older.

Authors:  Keith R Berend; Adolph V Lombardi; Thomas H Mallory; Kathie L Dodds; Joanne B Adams
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 4.757

View more
  19 in total

1.  Long-term results and bone remodeling after THA with a short, metaphyseal-fitting anatomic cementless stem.

Authors:  Young-Hoo Kim; Jang-Won Park; Jun-Shik Kim; Jun-Seok Kang
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-10-26       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Periprosthetic femoral fracture as cause of early revision after short stem hip arthroplasty-a multicentric analysis.

Authors:  Sang-Min Kim; Seung-Beom Han; Kee Hyung Rhyu; Jeong Joon Yoo; Kwang-Jun Oh; Je Hyun Yoo; Kyung-Jae Lee; Seung-Jae Lim
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Does stem design influence component positioning in total hip arthroplasty using a minimal invasive posterolateral approach?

Authors:  Wenzel Waldstein; Christian Merle; Tom Schmidt-Braekling; Friedrich Boettner
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-03-07       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  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

5.  High incidence of early subtrochanteric lateral cortical atrophy after hip arthroplasty using bone-conserving short stem.

Authors:  Yoon Je Cho; Chan Il Bae; Wan Keun Yoon; Young Soo Chun; Kee Hyung Rhyu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Early perioperative complication rates and subsidence with the Tribute® short cementless, tapered stem in primary total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  John Attenello; Sean Chan; Kelvin Naito; Michele Saruwatari; Sean Saito; Samantha Andrews; Cass Nakasone
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2019-01-17

7.  Does femoral stem choice influence fracture type or incidence for direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty?

Authors:  Dylan B Combs; Scott T Nishioka; Samantha N Andrews; Joseph Varcadipane; Cass K Nakasone
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-11-03       Impact factor: 2.928

8.  Short versus conventional stem in cementless total hip arthroplasty : An evidence-based approach with registry data of mid-term survival.

Authors:  Arnd Steinbrück; Alexander W Grimberg; Johanna Elliott; Oliver Melsheimer; Volkmar Jansson
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 1.087

9.  Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcome from Neck-Preserving, Short-Stem Arthroplasty and Resurfacing Arthroplasty in Younger Osteoarthritis Patients.

Authors:  Marius Dettmer; Amir Pourmoghaddam; Stefan W Kreuzer
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2015-05-26

Review 10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.