Literature DB >> 8245073

Cement-within-cement revision hip arthroplasty.

J R Lieberman1, B H Moeckel, B G Evans, E A Salvati, C S Ranawat.   

Abstract

We reviewed 19 revision hip arthroplasties in which the new femoral component had been recemented into the old, intact cement mantle. The mean time from the first operation to revision was 64 months and the average follow-up was 59 months. There were 7 excellent, 11 good, and one fair result. No femoral component had been revised for loosening and all the stems appeared radiographically stable. Complications included intraoperative perforation of the femur on two occasions and one dislocation. The use of the cement-within-cement technique requires that the old cement surface be dry and roughened to increase the surface area and that the cement be injected in the liquid phase to prevent lamination. The indications for this technique include a broken stem with an intact distal cement mantle, the removal of a femoral component for revision of a loose cup to improve exposure and/or increase offset, recurrent dislocation secondary to component malposition, and debonding of the femoral component within an intact cement mantle.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8245073

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br        ISSN: 0301-620X


  10 in total

Review 1.  Revision total hip arthroplasty: the femoral side using cemented implants.

Authors:  Graeme Holt; Samantha Hook; Matthew Hubble
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-12-17       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 2.  Revision arthroplasty: an update.

Authors:  D Williams; A Taylor; P McLardy-Smith
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  A valuable technique for femoral stem revision in total hip replacement: The in-cement revision - A case series and technical note.

Authors:  C J McDougall; J Yu; K Calligeros; R Crawford; C R Howie
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2016-07-01

4.  Cement-in-cement revision with the Exeter Short Revision Stem: A review of 50 consecutive hips.

Authors:  Andrew J Berg; Antonia Hoyle; Edward Yates; Aslam Chougle; Rama Mohan
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2019-04-09

5.  Alumina heads minimize wear and femoral osteolysis progression after isolated simple acetabular revision.

Authors:  Philippe Hernigou; Nicolas Dupuy; Olivier Pidet; Yashuhiro Homma; Charles Henri Flouzat Lachaniette
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 6.  The management of type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures: when to fix and when to revise.

Authors:  Adam T Yasen; Fares S Haddad
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-12-16       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Femoral cement within cement technique in carefully selected aseptic revision arthroplasties.

Authors:  Lucas Marcos; Martin Buttaro; Fernando Comba; Francisco Piccaluga
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-02-16       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  The cement-bone bond is weaker than cement-cement bond in cement-in-cement revision arthroplasty. A comparative biomechanical study.

Authors:  Marcin Ceynowa; Krzysztof Zerdzicki; Pawel Klosowski; Maciej Zrodowski; Rafal Pankowski; Marek Roclawski; Tomasz Mazurek
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-11       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Cement-in-cement stem revision for Vancouver type B periprosthetic femoral fractures after total hip arthroplasty. A 3-year follow-up of 23 cases.

Authors:  Toby W Briant-Evans; Darmaraja Veeramootoo; Eleftherios Tsiridis; Matthew J Hubble
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.717

Review 10.  Outcomes of dual modular cementless femoral stems in revision hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Ali Ghoz; Matthew L Broadhead; John Morley; Shawn Tavares; David McDonald
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2014-03-31
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.