Literature DB >> 8998868

Uncemented revision total hip arthroplasty: a 4-to-6-year review.

B D Mulliken1, C H Rorabeck, R B Bourne.   

Abstract

A review of 52 cementless revision total hip arthroplasties in 51 patients with a 4- to 6-year clinical and radiographic followup was conducted. Mallory Head titanium alloy prostheses using proximally porous-coated femoral stems were used in all cases. There were 2 revisions of the femoral component only and 1 was an acetabular revision. At an average followup of 4.6 years, 5 (10%) unstable femoral stems had been rerevised and another 7 (14%) stems were unstable radiographically, but rerevision had been refused or postponed. Three (6%) sockets were considered unstable but no acetabular revisions have been done. Eleven of the 12 stem failures were in femora with moderate or severe prerevision femoral bone loss. The Harris Hip Score averaged 76 points for the entire group, and scores were much worse in patients with preexisting femoral bone deficiency. Twenty (40%) femoral fractures occurred during stem insertion. This short-term study shows inadequate fixation of proximally porous-coated femoral stems in revisions with femoral bone loss; adequate stability is achieved if bone loss is limited. Porous-coated acetabular fixation using fins and screws where necessary is adequate in the majority of cases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8998868     DOI: 10.1097/00003086-199604000-00017

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


  9 in total

1.  Femoral revision with an extensively hydroxyapatite-coated femoral component.

Authors:  Lawrence V Gulotta; Andreas Baldini; Kristin Foote; Stephen Lyman; Bryan J Nestor
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2007-12-01

2.  What works best, a cemented or cementless primary total hip arthroplasty?: minimum 17-year followup of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Kristoff Corten; Robert B Bourne; Kory D Charron; Keegan Au; Cecil H Rorabeck
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-07-13       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 3.  Femoral revision with primary cementless stems: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Luca Cavagnaro; Matteo Formica; Marco Basso; Andrea Zanirato; Stefano Divano; Lamberto Felli
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2017-07-01

4.  Revision hip arthroplasty using a cementless modular tapered stem.

Authors:  Christophe Pattyn; Alexander Mulliez; René Verdonk; Emmanuel Audenaert
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-06-24       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Use of the Corail stem for revision total hip arthroplasty: evaluation of clinical outcomes and cost

Authors:  Thomas J. Wood; Mohammad Alzahrani; `Jacquelyn D. Marsh; Lyndsay E. Somerville; Edward M. Vasarhelyi; Brent A. Lanting
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 2.089

6.  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

7.  High medium-term survival of Zweymüller SLR-plus stem used in femoral revision.

Authors:  Panagiotis Korovessis; Thomas Repantis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-03-03       Impact factor: 4.176

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.  Mid-term results of previously cemented hip arthroplasties revised with uncemented modular femoral components: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Tahir Mutlu Duymus; Zafer Solak; Yusuf Ozturkmen; Ibrahim Azboy; Serhat Mutlu; Mustafa Caniklioglu
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 2.359

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.