Literature DB >> 22948527

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

Andrew P Van Houwelingen1, Clive P Duncan, Bassam A Masri, Nelson V Greidanus, Donald S Garbuz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Currently, the two most commonly used options for the revision of femoral components in North America are: cylindrical, nonmodular, cobalt-chromium stems and tapered, fluted, modular, titanium (TFMT) stems. Previous reports have cited high failure rates with cylindrical cobalt chrome stems in large femoral defects but the longer term survival of the fluted stems is unknown. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We examined the 5- to 10-year survival of TFMT stems implanted for severe femoral defects.
METHODS: We reviewed all 65 patients with severe proximal bone defects revised with the TMFT stem between January 2000 and 2006. Ten were lost to followup and seven were dead, leaving 48 patients for followup at 5 to 10 years (mean, 84 months; range, 60-120 months). All patients completed five quality-of-life (QOL) questionnaires. Radiographs were evaluated for loosening, subsidence, and preservation of proximal host bone stock.
RESULTS: Implant survivorship was 90%. No patient underwent revision for either subsidence or loosening. Subsidence occurred in seven patients (average, 12.3 mm) but all achieved secondary stability. Five patients underwent revision as a result of fracture of the stem and all had the original standard stem design, which has since been modified. All five implant fractures occurred at the modular stem junction. Mean QOL outcomes were: WOMAC = 81 (pain), Oxford = 75, SF-12 = 54 (mental) and 38 (physical), UCLA Activity = 4, and satisfaction overall = 73.
CONCLUSIONS: Midterm survivorship of modular titanium stems in large femoral defects is high; however, ongoing surveillance of stem junctional fatigue life is required. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 22948527      PMCID: PMC3549179          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-012-2552-8

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


  38 in total

1.  Cementless revision total hip arthroplasty without allograft in severe proximal femoral defects.

Authors:  Matthew C Nadaud; William L Griffin; Thomas K Fehring; J Bohannon Mason; Owen B Tabor; Susan Odum; Donna S Nussman
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  Femoral revision with a fluted, tapered, modular stem seventy patients followed for a mean of 3.9 years.

Authors:  Douglas P McInnis; Geoffrey Horne; Peter A Devane
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  Offering patients the opportunity to choose their hospital for total knee replacement: impact on satisfaction with the surgery.

Authors:  Elena Losina; Timothy Plerhoples; Anne H Fossel; Nizar N Mahomed; Jane Barrett; Alisha H Creel; Elizabeth A Wright; Jeffrey N Katz
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2005-10-15

4.  5- to 13-year follow-up study on cementless femoral components in revision surgery.

Authors:  A B Krishnamurthy; S J MacDonald; W G Paprosky
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 4.757

5.  A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity.

Authors:  J Ware; M Kosinski; S D Keller
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Fractures of distally-fixed femoral stems after revision arthroplasty.

Authors:  C A Busch; M N Charles; C M Haydon; R B Bourne; C H Rorabeck; S J Macdonald; R W McCalden
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2005-10

7.  Improved outcome in femoral revision arthroplasty with tapered fluted modular titanium stems.

Authors:  Donald S Garbuz; Andrew Toms; Bassam A Masri; Clive P Duncan
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Femoral fixation in the face of considerable bone loss: the use of modular stems.

Authors:  Scott M Sporer; Wayne G Paprosky
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Femoral fixation in the face of considerable bone loss: cylindrical and extensively coated femoral components.

Authors:  James P McAuley; C Anderson Engh
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Femoral revision hip arthroplasty with uncemented, porous-coated stems.

Authors:  J R Moreland; M L Bernstein
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  22 in total

Review 1.  Management of periprosthetic femoral fractures following total hip arthroplasty: a review.

Authors:  Matthew P Abdel; Umberto Cottino; Tad M Mabry
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-08-29       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  CORR Insights®: modular tapered implants for severe femoral bone loss in THA: reliable osseointegration but frequent complications.

Authors:  Curtis W Hartman
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-09-09       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Letter to the Editor: Is There a Benefit to Modularity in 'Simpler' Femoral Revisions?

Authors:  Bernd Fink
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 4.  The biological response to orthopaedic implants for joint replacement: Part I: Metals.

Authors:  Emmanuel Gibon; Derek F Amanatullah; Florence Loi; Jukka Pajarinen; Akira Nabeshima; Zhenyu Yao; Moussa Hamadouche; Stuart B Goodman
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 3.368

Review 5.  Management bone loss of the proximal femur in revision hip arthroplasty: Update on reconstructive options.

Authors:  Vasileios I Sakellariou; George C Babis
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2014-11-18

6.  Cementless revision femoral stems application of press-fit principles and clinical outcomes.

Authors:  François Canovas; Sophie Putman; Louis Dagneaux; Lamine Chadli; Pierre Le Béguec
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-12-15       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Single-stage Acetabular Revision During Two-stage THA Revision for Infection is Effective in Selected Patients.

Authors:  Bernd Fink; Michael Schlumberger; Damian Oremek
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-03-28       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Tapered fluted titanium stems in the management of Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures.

Authors:  Jacob T Munro; Donald S Garbuz; Bassam A Masri; Clive P Duncan
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Nonmodular Tapered Fluted Titanium Stems Osseointegrate Reliably at Short Term in Revision THAs.

Authors:  Nemandra A Sandiford; Donald S Garbuz; Bassam A Masri; Clive P Duncan
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-09-26       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Modular tapered implants for severe femoral bone loss in THA: reliable osseointegration but frequent complications.

Authors:  Nicholas M Brown; Matthew Tetreault; Cara A Cipriano; Craig J Della Valle; Wayne Paprosky; Scott Sporer
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.