Robert Pearse Piggott1,2, Rebecca Lyons1,2, Colin Gerard Murphy1,2, William Curtin1,2. 1. Research performed at Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Galway University Hospitals, Galway, Ireland. 2. Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Galway University Hospitals, Galway, Ireland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cementless total hip replacement is the common THR performed in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. The Corail stem is the most popular cementless implant and has a ODEP 10A rating. Review of its performance in the registry identified an increase rate of revision amongst the smaller stem sizes. However, clarity was not provided on the explanation for this finding. We reviewed our own experience of smaller stems with a view to understanding the reasons for revision. METHODS: We reviewed a single centre, single surgeon experience of the smaller Corail stem sizes for a ten-year period from 2003 to 2013. All data was collected from a prospectively maintained database. Details of clinical and radiological follow up were collected for all patients who had Corail stem size 8 and 9 implanted. Revision for any cause was taken as our endpoint. RESULTS: 542 patients underwent total hip arthroplasty using the Corail stem during the study period. 53 small size Corail stems were implanted. The average age was 59 (range 17-88 years) and the average follow up was 41.4 months (range 1-118 months). 6 patients underwent revision during the study period, but only 4 stems required revision. The reasons for revision were aseptic loosening, fracture and metal-on metal complications. Only two stems required revision for stem related factors (3.8%). CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of an increased rate of revision in the small Corail stems in our cohort.
BACKGROUND: Cementless total hip replacement is the common THR performed in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. The Corail stem is the most popular cementless implant and has a ODEP 10A rating. Review of its performance in the registry identified an increase rate of revision amongst the smaller stem sizes. However, clarity was not provided on the explanation for this finding. We reviewed our own experience of smaller stems with a view to understanding the reasons for revision. METHODS: We reviewed a single centre, single surgeon experience of the smaller Corail stem sizes for a ten-year period from 2003 to 2013. All data was collected from a prospectively maintained database. Details of clinical and radiological follow up were collected for all patients who had Corail stem size 8 and 9 implanted. Revision for any cause was taken as our endpoint. RESULTS: 542 patients underwent total hip arthroplasty using the Corail stem during the study period. 53 small size Corail stems were implanted. The average age was 59 (range 17-88 years) and the average follow up was 41.4 months (range 1-118 months). 6 patients underwent revision during the study period, but only 4 stems required revision. The reasons for revision were aseptic loosening, fracture and metal-on metal complications. Only two stems required revision for stem related factors (3.8%). CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of an increased rate of revision in the small Corail stems in our cohort.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cementless total hip replacement; Corail stem; Revision total hip replacement
Authors: F S Haddad; R R Thakrar; A J Hart; J A Skinner; A V F Nargol; J F Nolan; H S Gill; D W Murray; A W Blom; C P Case Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Br Date: 2011-05