Literature DB >> 29696415

Medium-term outcomes of the S-ROM modular femoral stem in revision hip replacement.

Jesús Moreta1, Iker Uriarte2, Xabier Foruria2, Ane Loroño3,4, Urko Agirre3,4, Iñaki Jáuregui2, José Luis Martínez-de Los Mozos2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to analyse results achieved with the S-ROM modular stem in revision surgery.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted from 2007 to 2015 including 51 patients who had a follow-up of ≥ 2 years and complete medical history. The mean age was 66.5 years old (34-87). The main reason for revision was aseptic loosening (38 cases, 74.5%), followed by infection (10, 19.6%), instability (2, 3.9%) and an adverse reaction associated with a metal-on-metal hip implant (1, 2%). Using the Paprosky classification, there were 22 cases of type I (43.1%), 27 of type II (52.9%) and 2 of type IIIA (4%). At the end of the follow-up, radiological parameters were assessed using Engh's criteria. Pre- and postoperative clinical status was assessed using the Harris Hip Score, a visual analogue scale and the Merle D'Aubigné score.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 5.7 years (2-10). The mean Harris Hip Score improved from 45.5 points (22-65) to 85.8 (55-100) (p < 0.001), and the final mean Merle D'Aubigné scores were 5.2, 4.6 and 5.6 for pain, ability to walk and mobility, respectively. Osseointegration was confirmed in all except one patient with fibrous non-union. No aseptic loosening has been recorded. Postoperative complications were deep infection in four cases (7.8%) and dislocation in three (5.9%).
CONCLUSION: This study indicates good medium-term outcomes using a modular hip replacement system with porous-coated proximal sleeves in revision surgery in patients with Paprosky type I and II defects.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Femoral modular stem; Non-cemented; Revision; Total hip replacement surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29696415     DOI: 10.1007/s00590-018-2213-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol        ISSN: 1633-8065


  28 in total

1.  Functional results of hip arthroplasty with acrylic prosthesis.

Authors:  R M D'AUBIGNE; M POSTEL
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1954-06       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Alarmingly High Rate of Implant Fractures in One Modular Femoral Stem Design: A Comparison of Two Implants.

Authors:  Ritesh R Shah; Jeffrey M Goldstein; Nancy E Cipparrone; Alexander C Gordon; Matthew L Jimenez; Wayne M Goldstein
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030.

Authors:  Steven Kurtz; Kevin Ong; Edmund Lau; Fionna Mowat; Michael Halpern
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Modular hip implant fracture at the stem-sleeve interface.

Authors:  Thomas Parisi; Brian Burroughs; Young-Min Kwon
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 1.390

5.  Structural and cellular assessment of bone quality of proximal femur.

Authors:  L D Dorr; M C Faugere; A M Mackel; T A Gruen; B Bognar; H H Malluche
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1993 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.398

6.  "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

7.  Clinical experience with a modular noncemented femoral component in revision total hip arthroplasty: 4- to 7-year results.

Authors:  M J Christie; D K DeBoer; E M Tingstad; M Capps; M F Brinson; L W Trick
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.757

8.  Revision total hip arthroplasty without cement: subsidence of proximally porous-coated femoral components.

Authors:  C L Peters; D P Rivero; L R Kull; J J Jacobs; A G Rosenberg; J O Galante
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  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

10.  Complex revision total hip arthroplasty with modular stems at a mean of 14 years.

Authors:  Joseph C McCarthy; Jo-Ann Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  3 in total

1.  Revision hip arthroplasty with a rectangular tapered cementless stem: a retrospective study of the SLR-Plus stem at a mean follow-up of 4.1 years.

Authors:  Iker Uriarte; Jesús Moreta; Laura Cortés; Lucía Bernuy; Urko Aguirre; José Luis Martínez de Los Mozos
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2019-10-15

2.  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

3.  [Revision reasons and prosthesis selection of Crowe developmental dysplasia of hip after total hip arthroplasty].

Authors:  Junmin Shen; Yonggang Zhou; Jingyang Sun; Haiyang Ma; Yinqiao Du; Zhisen Gao; Yawen Peng; Jiying Chen
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2020-05-15
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.