Literature DB >> 25690924

Outcome of a modular tapered uncemented titanium femoral stem in revision hip arthroplasty.

Maik Hoberg1, Christian Konrads, Jana Engelien, Dorothee Oschmann, Michael Holder, Matthias Walcher, Maximilian Rudert.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Revision hip arthroplasty using a modular tapered design gives the possibility for customising the prostheses to the individual anatomy intra-operatively. The success of this kind of surgery is still controversial due to the relative lack of medium- to long-term follow-up. Therefore we analysed the clinical and radiological outcome of the modular MRP-TITAN stem with diaphyseal fixation in revision hip surgery.
METHODS: In this retrospective study we included 136 consecutive patients with MRP-TITAN stem implanted during revision hip arthroplasty. The average follow-up was 55 months. For clinical evaluation we used the Harris Hip Score and the Merle d'Aubigné and Postel score. The health-related quality of life was determined with the visual analogue pain scale.
RESULTS: The surgeries were performed 109 months after primary total hip arthroplasty on average. The main indications for the MRP-TITAN revision stem were aseptic loosening, infection, and periprosthetic fracture. In the clinical outcome, patients achieved 75.1 points in the Harris Hip Score and 14.4 points in the Merle d'Aubigné and Postel Score. Mean level of persisting pain was 0.7 (VAS). The overall survival of the MRP stem in revision hip arthroplasty revealed 85.6% survival at 9.75 years' follow-up with a repeat revision rate of 6.8%.
CONCLUSIONS: Performing revision hip arthroplasty using the MRP-TITAN stem revealed a good clinical outcome. There is a tendency for better results in comparison with the information given in literature for cementless modular revision stems including a lower rate in re-revisions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25690924     DOI: 10.1007/s00264-015-2699-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  20 in total

Review 1.  A modular femoral implant for uncemented stem revision in THR.

Authors:  D C Wirtz; K D Heller; U Holzwarth; C Siebert; R P Pitto; G Zeiler; B A Blencke; R Forst
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Femoral revision: distal fixation with fluted, tapered grit-blasted stems.

Authors:  Daniel J Berry
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 4.757

Review 3.  [What can be done when hip prostheses fail? : New trends in revision endoprosthetics].

Authors:  S Gravius; T Randau; D C Wirtz
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Femoral strut allografts in cementless revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  J H Pak; W G Paprosky; W S Jablonsky; J M Lawrence
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  [Femur revision prosthesis].

Authors:  H Wagner; M Wagner
Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb       Date:  1993 Nov-Dec

6.  Ectopic ossification following total hip replacement. Incidence and a method of classification.

Authors:  A F Brooker; J W Bowerman; R A Robinson; L H Riley
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1973-12       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Cementless modular hip revision arthroplasty using the MRP Titan Revision Stem: outcome of 79 hips after an average of 4 years' follow-up.

Authors:  Alexander Schuh; Stefanie Werber; Ulrich Holzwarth; Günther Zeiler
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2004-04-03       Impact factor: 3.067

8.  A prospective study of hip revision surgery using the Exeter long-stem prosthesis: function, subsidence, and complications for 57 patients.

Authors:  K Randhawa; F S Hossain; B Smith; Cyril Mauffrey; T Lawrence
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2009-10-24

9.  Impaction grafting in the femur in cementless modular revision total hip arthroplasty: a descriptive outcome analysis of 243 cases with the MRP-TITAN revision implant.

Authors:  Matthias D Wimmer; Thomas M Randau; Moritz C Deml; Rudolf Ascherl; Ulrich Nöth; Raimund Forst; Nadine Gravius; Dieter Wirtz; Sascha Gravius
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2013-01-11       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Uncemented femoral revision arthroplasty using a modular tapered, fluted titanium stem: 5- to 16-year results of 163 cases.

Authors:  Dieter C Wirtz; Sascha Gravius; Rudolf Ascherl; Miguel Thorweihe; Raimund Forst; Ulrich Noeth; Uwe M Maus; Matthias D Wimmer; Günther Zeiler; Moritz C Deml
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2014-09-01       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  8 in total

1.  Closed suction drainage has no benefits in revision total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Simcha G Fichman; Tatu J Mäkinen; Benjamin Lozano; Wael A Rahman; Oleg Safir; Allan E Gross; David Backstein; Paul R T Kuzyk
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Fixation pattern of conical and cylindrical modular revision hip stems in different size bone defects.

Authors:  Stefan Kinkel; Jan Nadorf; Marc N Thomsen; Christian Heisel; Alexander Jahnke; Jan P Kretzer; Eike Jakubowitz
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Long-term survivorship of a monoblock long cementless stem in revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Yannick Herry; Anthony Viste; Hugo Bothorel; Romain Desmarchelier; Michel-Henri Fessy
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Mid-term Results of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Using Modular Cementless Femoral Stems.

Authors:  Hyung-Gyu Jang; Kyung-Jae Lee; Byung-Woo Min; Hee-Uk Ye; Kyung-Hwan Lim
Journal:  Hip Pelvis       Date:  2015-09-30

5.  Femoral revision surgery using a fully hydroxyapatite-coated stem: a cohort study of twenty two to twenty seven years.

Authors:  Olav Reikerås
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-04-30       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Comparable outcomes of in-cement revision and uncemented modular stem revision for Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fracture at 5 years.

Authors:  Antonio Klasan; James Millar; Jonathan Quayle; Bill Farrington; Peter Nicholas Misur
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-02-11       Impact factor: 3.067

7.  Medium Term Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes Using a Modular Tapered Hip Revision Implant.

Authors:  Gihan Jayasinghe; Chris Buckle; Lucy Clare Maling; Christopher To; Chukwudubem Anibueze; Parthiban Vinayakam; Richard Slack
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2021-04-05

Review 8.  Modular Stems: Advantages and Current Role in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Chan-Woo Park; Seung-Jae Lim; Youn-Soo Park
Journal:  Hip Pelvis       Date:  2018-09-04
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.